Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutVarious Documents 1994 MOUNDS VIEW CHARTER COMMISSION AGENDA WED. AUGUST 31, 1994, 7 P.M. CITY HALL 1. Approve Minutes of March 22, 1994 meeting 2. Report of Vice-Chair & Secretary re status of Charter re-draft 3. Introduction of Charter Attorney Gregg Herrick of Barna, Guzy & Steffen 4. Discussion of legal issues presented by proposals to go to voters: a. Term limits (Legal memorandum enclosed) b. Burden of proof on petitioners using initiative c. Primary elections 5. Handout draft #2 of Charter 6. Discuss future meetings 7. Discuss re-appointments to Charter Commission 8. Adjournment IF YOU ARE UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE CALL MICHELE AT CITY HALL AND LEAVE A MESSAGE (phone 784-3055). • MEMORANDUM TO: CHARTER COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: JULIE TRUDE, SECRETARY DATE: August 25, 1994 RE: EXPIRING TERMS The Court Administrator of Ramsey County District Court has informed me that the terms of seven charter members expire on October 31, 1994. The following members will have completed their second term as of that date and will be ineligible to serve another term: Lloyd Bardwell, Susan Hankner, Robert Toborg and Arlene Werdien. The following three members are eligible to serve a second term: David Long, Russell Warren and myself. If you would like to be re-appointed I need to know at our next meeting so I can contact Mr. Joseph Gockowski. The city will be advertising the four vacancies and asking for interested persons to send a letter with background information to: Mr. Joseph E. Gockowski Court Administrator Ramsey County District Court 600 Courthouse St. Paul, MN 55102-1652 Mr. Gockowski maintains files for the Chief Judge who makes the actual appointments. It should be made clear applicants are seeking appointment to the Mounds View Charter Commission so the letters get in the correct file. Any applications or letters received at City Hall will be forwarded to the above address. PROPOSALS TO GO TO VOTERS Section 4 . 02, Subdivision 2 Term Limits . No elected City officer holder will be allowed to serve more than eight consecutive years in the same. office. Section 5 .04, Subdivision 2 Proposed Language for Burden of Proof on Petitioners Using Initiative. If the City Council determines on its own motion that a sufficient and regular petition is determined to be illegal under case law, legal precedence, or constitutional nonconformity, thereby refusing to submit an initiative to the voters as provided in this Charter, a court order or injunction permitting the City Council authority to refuse such election must be produced by the Council within 15 days of thedate of determination of sufficiency. If the Council has not acted according to this subdivision within the above 15 days period, the sponsoring committee may appeal to the Charter Commission and the Charter Commission may provide for said election to be paid by the City. The Clerk-Administrator shall provide for said election upon the order of a majority vote of the Charter Commission. Section 4 . 03 Primary Elections . On a Tuesday at least four weeks in advance of the regular municipal election as determined by the Council, such as concurrent with a statewide primary, there shall be a primary election for the selection of two nominees for each office to be filled at the municipal election, unless no more than four times the number of candidates to be elected file for any elective office. No primary shall be required in the event a special election is required regardless of the number of candidates filing for office. ROBERT A.GUZY PAMELA M.HARRIS BERNARD E.�STEFFEN CHARLES M.SEYKORA RICHARD A.MERRILL i i WILLIAM M.HANSEN DARRELL A.lENSEN \� JEFFREY S.JOHNSON DANIEL D.tJANTER.jR. RUSSELL H.CROWDER BEVERLY K.DODGE JON P.ERICKSON Barna Guzy LSZ. Steffen Ltd. CRAIG M.H ERS LAWRENCE IL IOHNSON , JAMES I V.HERRICK DAVID A.COSSI ATTORNEYS AT LA\V JAMES D.HOEFT THOMAS R\TALON" JOAN Ni.QUAD" NIICIIAELF.HURLEY 100 Northrown Financial Plaza S .LEPAK STEVEN L.MACKEY I[iGll_C.HERRICK 200 Coon Rapids Boulevard ELIZABETH A.SCHADING HERMAN L.T:\LLE Nvlinneapolis, MN 55433-5189 WILLIAM F.HUEFNER ROBERT C.HYNES (612) 780-8500 FAX (612) 780-1777 ;935-1993 Writer's Direct Line: (612) 783-5123 MEMORANDUM TO: Mounds View Charter Commission FROM: Gregg Herrick RE: Term Limits DATE: June 28 , 1994 QUESTION DOES THE CITY• HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO INSTITUTE TERM LIMITS THROUGH- ITS CHARTER FOR THE CITY COUNCIL? The Attorney Gneral's Opinion of April 14 , 1981 has been questioned and I have been asked to give an independent opinion regarding the Charter Commission's ability to place term limits on elected municipal offices within the City. After conducting considerable research into this question, I have come -to the conclusion that there is no direct case law interpreting this particular question. I have, therefore, reviewed the cases cited by the Attorney General, as well as a review of the cases since the 1981 Attorney General' s Opinion. Since there—was a_mosr- neat in the State Legislature last Session to establish term limits I also obtained information on their interpretation of the' Question. I also contacted the League of Minnesota Cities to see if they had any prepared material on this topic. The research shows that one's eligibility to hold office is generally viewed as a fundamental right. It is also clear that prior to the 1958 Constitutional Amendment, the Court interpreted the Constitution as restricting any legislative body's ability to enact laws restricting individual's lright to hold office. The 1958 Amendment provides that the Legislature may provide for 1The Constitution provides that to hold office an individual must be entitled to vote. A,,i i.c,i C;•,,,xnntr:i5nui,n cr Mounds View Charter Commission June 28 , 1994 Page Two qualifications for local government office. The language of Article XII, Section 3 on its face seems clear. The Amendment gives the State Legislature the right to provide qualifications for local office. While this Constitutional Amendment may give the Legislature the authority to grant to individual municipalities the right to set qualifications for local office, there is no statute, in my opinion, which could be interpreted as attempting to convey such authority. There is a recent case in which the Appellate Court reviewed the Legislature's authority to place limitations on eligibility for county sheriffs positions. In Elbers v. Grow, 502 N.W. 2d 310 (Minn. App. 1993) the Appellate Court was asked to rule on the ability of the State Legislature to place limitations on -- individuals for two separate county sheriffs positions. The Court held that the "plain language" of Minnesota's Constitution, Article XII, Section 3 , clearly authorizes the Legislature to change qualifications for local office. While the Elbers Court did not address the issue of local regulations of local offices, it very clearly concluded that the State Legislature under Article XII , Section 3 , was the body authorized to place qualifications on local offices. In the State Legislature last year there was a proposed Bill which called for term limits. The Bill which would have sent the issue of term limits to the voters failed in a Senate Committee and was never acted upon. I am enclosing a copy of a portion of a House Research Department position paper on term limits for elected offices, dated November of 1993 . In that memo the Hcuse Research Department indicated that local government offices can be subject to statutory term limits . This Opinion is consistent with the Elbers Opinion, as well as the Attorney General' s Opinion that th_e_Stat_e_Legi_slatur_e s the body which has—the authority to .lace limitations on holding .local office. Based upon my research I find no authority for a charter amendment creating term limits . __ ...;__,3, 22. g .4 0a : SG. .\4 ». LEAGUE OF MN CITIES CS Li1993 November r House Research Department 8 Term Limits for Elective Office Depending on the office, term limits could become law . .. in Minnesota by.constitutional amendment or statute. . . . .. . The method for adopting term limits in Minnesota depends on which elective offices are �_.--- -- being covered. ••For constitutionally created offic es4 testa limits would require passage of a , ,,, ;= constitutional. amendment.-Fut eleerive offices in local government , the legislature may.: . set tecta limits in statute. For federal elective officesthere is a strong argument that a state . N . cannot impose term limits..: The issue remains open pig litigation in other states that have -, _ - adopted team limits forniernbers of Congress. • A constitutional amendment is required to adopt term limits for constitutional offices because the state constitution sets the standards of eligibility to hold office and the particular qualifications for individual constitutional offices. Article VII, section 6, of the Minnesota • --Constitution allows every_eligible muter,.21.or_more years old, moding in the ons to the elieleviant distdct.. . „„:, for 30 days prior to the ele on;'to seek os�ce. �SI be'"outy e�cxpd ;J ,;�,. on *the constitution and law of the _ _ language are those "otherwise opt�this�ia.this.c����a sta�ta constitutional time United States." By the terms -fig an or�cx created by the Constitution ndment could change the eligibility requirements tit be subject to statuterrJ term.limits. The A�tnnesora',,~ :„z�'*•-' ]:.octal gvve?7imani offices, in canirast, can oa of Local :" express authorizes the legislat re to provide by law for the creati 41,4 f ggc t units and the qualifications for local elective offices.* • .• ' 4. �rovertor. Liauteasat Governor. Secretary of State, Attorney General. Treasurer. Reprerentaave, Senator. Iudze. "Scheibe! v. Patvialc. 282 N.W..,d 843 (Minn. 1979). 'NLiitri uta Constitution. ariele C see='on 3. MOUNDS VIEW CHARTER COMMISSION MINUTES MARCH 22, 1994 I. Call to Order Chair Len:Burgers called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. in the Mounds View City Hall. II. Roll Call Present: Virgil Beyers, Len Burgers, Jerry Linke, Dave Long, Laurie Schley, Julie Trude, Russ Warren, Bill Werner and Ruth White. Absent (excused): Lloyd Bardwell, Sue Hankner, Duane McCarty, Richard Oman and Bob Toborg. Absent (unexcused): Arlene Werdien. III. Approval of Minutes Upon the motion of Jerry Linke, seconded by Virgil Beyer, the Minutes of the March 8, 1994 meeting were unanimously approved as submitted. IV. Chair's Report Len Burgers noted that the votes taken on term limits, primaries, and the mayor's term were_consistent_with_the consensus-reached-by th- e commission at its-June L993 meetings. Len Burgers noted that he had contacted Jean Miller and she is willing to be the commission's English teacher, reviewing our draft for punctuation and correct grammar and style. The Chair reported that Julie Trude had obtained a copy of the Holmes and Graven billings for David Kennedy's work in the Fall of 1992. The City had allotted $4500 -1- for the legal work required to re-draft the Charter. Mr. Kennedy's billings, including those for work before his first meeting and his memorandum noting the legal changes the Charter should make, totaled $1,364.50. V. Charter Review Term Limits: Ruth White offered the proposal from the June 1993 meetings for inclusion on the Fall ballot: "4.02, subd. 2. No elected city office holder will be allowed to hold more than eight consecutive years in the same office." The commission briefly discussed the state constitutional law issue presented by a term limit proposal--that the city can't violate the State Constitution which prohibits limits on office seekers. The commission agreed that the wording on the ballot would have to make successful passage of a city term limit proposal dependent on the concurrent successful passage of a state constitutional amendment allowing term limits. Primary Election: The commission noted that the language previously discussed and proposed to the voters as potential new section 4.03 was: "On a Tuesday at least four weeks in advance of the regular municipal election as determined by the council, such as concurrent with a statewide primary, there shall be a primary election for the selection of two nominees for each office to be filled at the municipal election, unless no more than four imes the number-of candidates-to be-elected-file-forany elective office. No primary shall be required in the event a special election is required regardless of the number of candidates filing for office." The commission briefly discussed the operation of this primary--it would only be required if more than 4 persons file for mayor and/or more than 8 persons file for 2 council seats. Burden of proof re petitions: The commission agreed no changes would be required in the language proposed for Sec. 5.04, subd. 2. "If the City Council determines on its own motion that a sufficient and regular petition is determined to be illegal under case law, legal precedence, or constitutional nonconformity, thereby refusing to submit an initiative to the voters as provided in this Charter, a court order or injunction permitting the City Council authority to refuse such election must be produced by the Council within 15 days of the date of determination of sufficiency. If the Council has not acted according to this subdivision within the above 15 day period, the sponsoring committee may appeal to the Charter Commission and the Charter Commission may •b provide for said election to be paid by the City. The Clerk-Administrator shall provide for said election upon the order of a majority vote of the Charter Commission." This language will be included in the re-draft. Recall The draft of recall distributed in the February packet was discussed. The. commission amended the first sentence to read: "The citizens of the City may request a recall vote of any elected officer of the City by petition." In addition the grounds for recall in the second sentence shall be limited to "malfeasance," following the recommendation of attorney David Kennedy. Section 7.06: Laurie Schley reviewed her proposed rewording of this section. Following a discussion of the commission's goals in the budgeting process, the consensus developer)thatth-e-wordingproposed at the-I14ai-ch-t-i-meeting-should-be followed. ("The budget resolution must show the total revenues and expenditures for each budgeted fund and each department . . .") VI. Other Substantive Issues from Charter Re-draft Julie Trude noted that the commission had not yet reviewed the number of persons required for a successful petition. She had learned that in the 1992 general election, the votes cast for mayor totaled 5648 and the votes cast for president totaled 6239. The existing Charter requires 15% of those voting for president or 936 persons to sign a successful petition. The commission had proposed changing the requirement to 20% of those voting for mayor, or 1130 required for a successful petition. The goal of the commission was not to raise the number of persons required to successfully petition the city. Motion by Julie Trude, seconded by Jerry Linke to use the original charter requirement that 15% of those voting for president in the last general election be required to present a successful petition to the City. Vote: 8 ayes; 0 nays (Dave Long was absent for this vote.) Motion passes unanimously. VII. Agenda for Next Meeting Motion by Jerry Linke, second by Laurie Schley, to allow the Chair to set the next meeting of the Charter Commission allowing the Secretary time to have the document updated and retyped, the English teacher time to review the re-draft and the lawyer time to review the polished copy. In addition a list of the proposals for voters should be prepared before the next meeting is set. Votes: 8 ayes, 0 nays. Motion passes unanimously. VIII. Adjournment Upon the motion of Julie Trude, seconded by Virgil Beyer, the commission voted — unanimously to adjourn the meeting at 8:35 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ulie Trude, Secretary -4- s Li I - 3490 Lexington Avenue North League of Minnesota Cities St. Paul, MN 55126-8044 August 19, 1994 Ms. Julie Trude Councilmember City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 Dear Ms. Trude: I am writing in response to your request for an informal review of the proposed new charter that the City of Mounds View is considering adopting. It is my understanding that the City has retained Greg Herrick of the Barna-Guzy law firm to provide a formal legal review, but you wanted the League's input as much of the charter is based on our model. In addition, you had a few specific questions that you wanted addressed. I have read everything that you sent to me and I hope that the following provides the information for which you are looking. First, from a general perspective, the proposed charter looks good. I did not spot any provision that should create any significant legal problems. While a legal challenge is always a possibility, the risk of such a challenge to any of the proposed charter provisions seems low and the risk of the city not prevailing in such a case seems even less likely. There are, however, a few provisions the city may wish to consider fine tuning. These sections are as follows: Section Potential Problem/Suggestion 1. 01 Fails to address boundary changes ' stemming from annexations, detachments, etc. Current charter's language in regard to name, location, and boundaries is more comprehensive. 2 . 03 Literal interpretation of the "and/or" provision for term of office creates a conflict with the vacancy provisions as it literally reads that a successor must be elected not appointed as would occur in a vacancy. Provision could simply provide that term would continue until successor qualifies for office. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER (612)490-5600 1-500-925-1122 plus your city code TDD(612)490-9038 Fas i 612)4904 2 . 05 Sub-part 7 could potentially be challenged as not being sufficient to reach a level of malfeasance or nonfeasance. City should have a strong argument that failure to perform duties without a sufficient reason for a period of three months is nonfeasance. 3 . 05 Has city considered allowing dispensing of two week delay on passage of ordinance if council votes to do so even in a non-emergency when efficiency, etc. might be better served? 3 . 07 Requires both full text and a summary to be published. This could prove very costly and impractical for lengthy ordinances such as zoning issues. City should consider authorizing summary-only publications similar to those described in M.S. 331A. 01. 4 . 05 Procedure can get very confusing to follow as subdivisions 4 and 5 are not totally consistent. If subdivision 5 is to be followed, subdivision,4 should specify ". . . except as provided in subdivision 5. . . . " In addition, these two provisions could probably be re-worded and combined into one easier to follow subdivision. 5. 03 Would be easier to prove numbers if it just required a set percentage of the voters voting_in the last regular city election as opposed to requiring a percentage of Presidential votes. 5 . 08 Should also provide for recall in case of nonfeasance. 6. 03-6 . 04 Has city considered granting authority. to allow counsel to combine the clerk and treasurer positions by ordinance should this become desirable? 7 . 07 Very strict requirements. How about emergencies, etc. ? 10. 01 Typo. The first "by" should be "be". I will now turn to the specific questions that you asked. First, it does not appear to be a legal requirement that an election be held before a utility is sold. Under an old law, M.S. 457. 13 , an election was apparently required before the sale of a water or electric utility, but this statute was repealed by the legislature. I discussed this matter with Stan Peskar, the League's general counsel who has worked with a number of home rule charters, and he agreed that it no longer appears to be a legal requirement to hold an election before the sale of an utility. He did state, however, that most charter cities have retained provisions similar to Mounds View's section 11. 04 for political reasons. The sale of a utility is a major step for a city to take and one that is hard to undo. Thus, to keep any one faction from having the power to bind a city to the sale of a utility, most charter cities require the approval of the general public. It should be noted that absent a formal requirement, the issue of the sale of a utility would still be subject to the initiative and referendum provisions of the charter. Second, the process the proposed charter outlines for determining the sufficiency of a petition appears to be the most common approach and one that should minimize any legal problems. The clerk conducts the initial review and submits his or her findings to the council who must make the actual determination. As the council would have to act on any sufficient petition, they should be the ones who make the formal decision as to the petition's sufficiency. Of course, the person(s) who filed the petition could seek a court order on the issue, but the initial determination needs to be made first. The council should consult with the city attorney whenever it has a question about a petition's sufficiency. Having the council attempt to gain judicial review on each petition would prove costly and there is the possibility that the court would refuse to act on the matter. Third, you inquired as to whether the charter could provide for a higher filing fee for elected offices than what is provided for in the statutes. In the case of non-city offices, the answer appears to be no as the funds collected goto the county_and state and f_i-l-i.nc_f-e-es do not fit within the areas of an election that M.S. 410 . 02f authorizes charters to regulate over the provisions of state law. When it comes to local office filing fees, however, the statutes specifically authorize charter cities to set their own rates. M.S. 205 . 13 , subd. 3 , states that the fees of that statute shall be charged unless the charter of the city provides for the fee in that city. Finally, the general provisions of chapters 1 and 12 are fine as they currently . exist, although the comments outlined above still apply. In addition, the city might want to consider adopting a provision stating that the city will follow the procedures outlined for statutory cities whenever the charter proves to be silent on an issue. The authority to do this was specifically granted during the past legislative session. Not all charter cities desire to take this approach, however. Such a provision would coincide with section 12 . 08 . I hope that this information adequately addresses your concerns. I am enclosing some statutory provisions that might be of some interest to you. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me again. As we discussed, however, I will be out of the office until September 7 . Sincerely, - „ Kent Sulem Codification Attorney Enc: 1994 REGULAR SESSION Ch. 446, § 1 by the affidavit required by section 327.64 if notice is mailed to the debtor. The notices required by section 327.64 shall not be considered as satisfying any of the notice requirements under chapter 565. Presented to the governor April 12. 1994. Approved April 15, 1994. CORONERS—EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS—EXEMPTIONS • CHAPTER 445 S.F. No. 2672 AN ACT relating to coroners: providing for exemption from educational requirements in certain circumstances; amending Minnesota Statutes 1992,section 390.005,subdivision 3. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA. Section 1. Minnesota.Statutes 1992, section 390.005, subdivision.3, is•amended to read: • Subd. 3. EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS. A.coroner must have successfully com- pleted academic courses in pharmacology, surgery, pathology; toxicology, and physiology. • However, if a board of county commissioners determines that-the-office of coroner shall not be elective and it cannot appoint any person meeting the educational qualifications as coroner, the board may; - (1) appoint any qualified person, whether or not a resident_of the county. ar--uotj or (2) if no qualified person can be found, appoint a person who is serving.or has served as ' -r deputy coroner,whether or not a resident of the county. • Sec. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. _--.. __ ► Section 1 is effective the day following final enactment... - __-- Presented to the governor April 12, 1994. Approved April 15, 1994. CITIES—HOME RULE CHARTER—LAWS APPLICABLE. • • x. S.F. No. 2070 _ i 1�1 ACT relating to-citieg-allowing-home-rule charter-cities-to-apply-law-applicable-to-statutory cities in instances in which the charter is silent,with certain restrictions proposing coding for I new law in Minnesota Statutes,chapter 410. _._ -- BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE- OF MINNESOTA: . - Section 1. 410.33 SAVINGS CLAUSE. .rte. _�- - # • If a city charter is silent on a matter that is addressed for statutory cities by-chapter 412 or. a`. - other general law and general law does not prohibit a city charter fromaddressing the matter or expressly provide that a city charter prevails over general law:on the matter,then the city mayapply thegeneral law on the matter: pp Y Presented to the governor April 12, 1994. • Approved April 15, 1994. Additions are indicated by underline: deletions by stsilosout 191 '• • Y .r ay- ' J F y I . 699 NEWSPAPERS 331A.02 } a regular basis to gather news and sell advertisements and subscriptions,whether or not 1 printing or any other operations of the newspaper are conducted at or from the office, and devoted primarily to business related to the newspaper. 5GI . Subd. 10. "Summary" means an accurate and intelligible abstract or synopsis of . ^E 3--; " the essential elements of proceedings, ordinances, resolutions, and other official actions.It shall be written in a clear and coherent manner,and shall,to the extent possi- ble,avoid the use of technical or legal terms not generally familiar to the public.When a summary is published,the publication shall clearly indicate thaepbat m ie- • ;'' rial is only a summary and that the full text is available for public inspectioni , nated location.A sum Lary published in conformity with this section shall be deemed to fulfill all legal publication requirements as completely as if the entire matte local was summarized had been published. No liability shall be asserted again public corporation in connection with the publication of a summary or agenda. History: 1984 c 543 s 20; 1986 c 444 331A.02 REQUIREMENTS FOR A QUALIFIED NEWSPAPER. _ Subdivision 1. Qualification. No newspaper in this state shall be entitled to any • compensation or fee for publishing any public notice unless it is qualified as a medium of official and legal publication.A newspaper that is not qualified must inform a public body that presents a public notice for publication that it is not qualified.To be qualified , as a medium of official and legal publication, a newspaper shall: (a) be printed in the English language in newspaper format and in column and sheet form equivalent in printed space to at least 1,000 square inches; (b) if a daily,be distributed at least five days each week,or if not a daily,be distrib- • uted at least once each week,for 50 weeks each yam.In an rarewelin which a legal holi- ;. day is included, not more than four issues of a daily paper (c) in at least half of its issues each year, have no more than 75 percent of its printed space comprised of advertising material more often than weekly, or 50 percent, issues each year,have 25 percent,if publishedwhich • i . if weekly,of its news columns devoted to news of local interest to the community a . it purports to serve.Not more than 25 percent of its total nonadvertising coltimn inches I s in any issue may wholly duplicate any other publication unless the duplicated material -� is from recognized general news services; ` (d) be circulated in the•local public corporation which it purports to serve, and either have at least 500 copies regularly delivered to paying subscribers,or have at least 500 copies regularly distributed without charge to local residents; i , (e) have its known office of issue established in either the county in which lse,in _�. • whole or in part, the local public corporation which the newspaper purports4 • or in an adjoining county . (f) file a copy of each issue immediately with the state historical society; • (g) be made available at single or subscription prices to any person,corporation, .•i •artnership,or other unincorpo rated association requesting the newspaper and making the applicable payment, or be distributed without-eharg to-local-residents; (h) have complied with all the foregoing conditions of this subdivision for at least '• one year immediately preceding the date of the notice publication; and .' (i) between September 1 and December 31 of each year publish and submit to the secretary of state,along with a filing fee of$25, a sworn United States Post Office sec- • ond-class statement of ownership and circulation or a statement of ownership and cir- culation verified by a recognized independent circulation auditing agencyrinfilig ag : period of not less than one year ending no earlier than the June 30 preceding the deadline,provided that a filing published and submitted after December 31 and before July 1 shall be effective from the date of filing through December 31 of that year.The secretary of state shall make the list of newspapers whose filings have been accepted a %` available for public inspection.The acceptance of a filing does not constitute a guaran- i= =L tee by the state that any other qualification requirement has been met. 1 qt% s= 1029 MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS 205.13 205.11 MS 1957 [Repealed, 1959 c 675 art 13 s 11 205.11 MS 1982 [Repealed, 1983 c 62 s 121 205.12 MS 1957 [Repealed, 1959 c 675 art 13 s 11 205.12 MS 1974 [Repealed, 1976 c 44 s 701 205.121 NOMINATING PE iii IONS;CITIES OF FIRST CLASS;SIGNATURES• A nominating petition filed on behalf of a candidate for municipal office in a city • of the first class shall be signed by eligible voters who maintain residence in the election district from which the candidate is to be elected. The number of signers shall equal 500, or two percent of the total number of individuals who voted in the municipality, ward,or other election district at the last preceding municipal general election,which- ever is greater. History: 1981 c 29 art 7 s 9 it If 205.13 MS 1957 [Repealed, 1959 c 675 art 13 s 11 _ F. , 205.13 CANDIDATES, FILING. -N•_";._ Subdivision 1. Affidavit of candidacy.Not more than .y , (1) eight nor less than six weeks in the case of a town, or cs ! . (2) not more than ten nor less than eight weeks, in the case of a city, _ ,t; before the municipal primary, or before the municipal general election if there is no municipal primary,an individual who is eligible and desires to become a candidate for an office to be voted for at the election shall file an affidavit of candidacy with the municipal clerk.The affidavit shall be in substantially the same form as that in section #.i• 204B.06,subdivision 1.The municipal clerk shall also accept an application signed by fi ,'I not less than five voters and filed on behalf of an eligible voter in the municipality 2 • whom they desire to be a candidate, if service of a copy of the application has been i< 4. made on the candidate and proof of service is endorsed on the application being filed. 4 • _ 1 Upon receipt'of the proper filing fee, the clerk shall place the name of the candidate 1 on the official ballot without partisan designation.The filing dates contained in this sub- .% • . division do not apply to any home rule charter city whose charter provides for earlier ; "4... ' filing dates. Subd. 2.Notice of filing dates.At least two weeks before the first day to file affida- .14 i vits of candidacy, the municipal clerk shall publish a notice stating the first and last :.•_ , dates on which affidavits of candidacy may be filed in the clerk's office and the closing i-` i. nine for filing on the last day for filing.The clerk shall post a similar notice at least ten .1 i, days before the first day to file affidavits of candidacy. . t Subd. 3.Filing fees.Unless the charter of a city provides the amount of the fee for `_ '.'1 filing an application or affidavit of candidacy for city office,the filing fee for a municipal t:•=:•• office is as follows: (a)In-irst-clnss-cities,S20; ti .-3`r; - (b) In second and third class cities, $5; and ;F , . ' (c) In fourth class cities and towns, $2. y. ,---..:•;„ .; Subd. 4. Petition in place of fees.A candidate for municipal office may file a peti- •s tion in place of the filing fees specified in subdivision 3. The petition shall meet the fi=_•'e requirements of section 204B.11, subdivision 2. i._--:_- i'-_: Subd. 5. Nominating petition;cities of the first class.A nominating petition filed :r on behalf of a candidate for municipal office in a city of the first class shall be signed i • by eligible voters who reside in the election district from which the candidate is to be ,,it aY. -: elected.The number of signers shall be at least 500,or two percent of the total number .y , ::; :��>_.t: of individuals who voted in the municipality,ward, • or other election district at the last , preceding municipal general election, whichever is greater. • . 4- -:;1"e - Subd. 6. Withdrawal. A candidate for a municipal elective office may withdraw • ; '.' c'". from the election by filing an affidavit of withdrawal with the municipal clerk by 12te: i'. rrt r.'yj`• . ' S ..... 453 3 CLASSIFICATION;CHARTERS 410.30 it•and duties in any such city shall be distributed into and among departments and rt.), provide that the council may determine the powers and duties to be performed y and assign them to the appropriate department and determine who shall be the head if each department and prescribe the powers and duties of all officers and employees thereof, and may assign particular officers or employees to perform duties in two or more departments, and make such other rules and regulations as may be necessary or proper for the efficient and economical conduct of the business of the city. History:(1292) 1909 c 170 s 3; 1959 c 305 s 5 410.19 POWERS OF MAYOR AND COUNCIL. The charter commission may incorporate in such charter provisions defining the powers and duties of the mayor and each member of the.council,and may provide that ' each member of the council shall perform such administrative duties as may be desig- nated in such charter. f t History: (1293) 1909 c 170 s 4; 1959 c 305 s 5 ' 410.20 RECALL AND REMOVAL OF OFFICERS; ORDINANCES. i Such commission may also provide for the recall of any elective municipal officer and for removal of the officer by vote of the electors of such city,and may also provide -_ for submitting ordinances to the council by petition of the electors of such city and for the repeal of ordinances in like manner,and may also provide that no ordinance passed by the council, except an emergency ordinance, shall take effect within a certain time l after its passage,and that if,during such time,a petition be made by a certain percent- r t age of the electors of the city protesting against the passage of such ordinance until the ! r f same be voted on at an election held for such purpose,and then such ordinance to take effect or not as determined by such vote. History: (1294 1909 E` c170s5, 1959c305s5;1986 c 444 I k: 410.21 APPLICATION OF GENERAL ELECTION LAWS. • 't' ' The provisions of any charter of any such city adopted pursuant to this chapter ! shall be yalid and shall control as to nominations, primary elections,and elections for municipal offices, notwithstanding that such charter provisions may be inconsistent with any general law relating thereto,.and such general laws shall apply only in so far as consistent with such charter. k History:(1295) 1909 c 170 s 6 ' c! .r` 410.22 [Repealed, 1973 c 503 s 61 t 410.23 f ' + [Repealed, 1959 c 305 s 61 410.24 NEW OR REVISED CHARTER. i y: Any-Gity-having-a-home-rule—cha er may su.mit and adopt a new or revised charter ' y in the manner provided by law for the original adoption of such home rule charter. f-1 History: (1298) 1909 c 236 s 2; 1961 c 608 s 8 ` 410.25 [Repealed, 1959 c 305 s 61 410.26 [Repealed, 1961 c 608 s 101 • 410.27 [Repealed, 1973 c 503 s 61 • 410.30 ABANDONMENT OF HOME RULE CHARTERS BY CITIES;ASSUMP- 4: TION OF STATUTORY CITY STATUS. Any city of any class having a home rule charter may abandon such charter and 1 ;t become a statutory city.A proposal to abandon the charter shall be presented,adopted, ' and become effective in the same manner as a charter amendment, and all statutory provisions relating to home rule charter amendments shall apply to a proposal to aban- s` ! HOLMES & GRAVEN CHARTERED Attorneys at Law 470 Pillsbury Center,Minneapolis,Minnesota 55402 ROBERT A.ALSOP (612)337-9300 ROBERT C.LONG RONALD H.BATTY LAURA K.MOLLET STEPHEN J.BUBUL Facsimile(612)337-9310 BARBARA L.PORTWOOD JOHN B.DEAN JAMES M.STROMMEN MARY G.DOBBINS JAMES J.THOMSON,JR. STEFANIE N.GALEY LARRY M.WERTHEIM CORRINE A.HEINE BONNIE L.WILKINS JAMES S.HOLMES WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL GARY P.WINTER DAVID J.KENNEDY JOHN R.LARSON 337-9209 DAVID L.GRAVEN(1929.1991) WELLINGTON H.LAW VIA RAPIFAX AND MAIL OF COUNSEL CHARLES L.LEFEVERE ROBERT C.CARI.SON JOHN M.LEFEVRE,JR. ROBERT L.DAVIDSON ROBERT J.LINDALL T.JAY SALMEN November 10, 1994 Samantha Orduno Clerk-Administrator City of Mounds View 2401 Highway 10 Mounds View, MN 55112-1499 RE: Term Limits Charter Amendment Dear Samantha: You inquired as to what the process would be if the city council wanted to challenge the constitutionality of the term limit charter amendment that was on the November 8, 1994 ballot. The city council would have essentially two options if it desires to challenge the constitutionality of the charter amendment provision. The first option would be to commence a declaratory judgment action in state court. The action would need to name as a defendant a person or entity that has a stake in upholding the ballot proposition. Because there is a case currently pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court (see discussion below), I doubt that a trial court would decide the city's case until the Minnesota Supreme Court issues its ruling. T-he-second option--would involve-not filing-a-cop-y-ofthe-c-har-te-r-amendment with--the Secretary of State or County Recorder. Minnesota Statutes, Section 410.112, subd. 4, states that the procedure for filing amendments to the charter is the same as the procedure followed when the original charter was adopted. Minnesota Statutes, Section 410.11, sets forth that process. That section provides: "The city clerk shall file with the secretary of state, the county recorder of the county in which the city lies, and in the city clerk's office a copy of the charter accompanied by a certificate attesting to the accuracy of the copy and giving the date of the election and the vote by which the charter was adopted." I have checked with the Minneapolis city attorney's office and they inform me that their case on the constitutionality of term limits is currently pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court. The question that the Minnesota Supreme Court will address is whether term limits violate Article 7, Section 6 of the Minnesota Constitution. (That provision establishes the qualifications to hold elective office.) The briefing of that issue by the parties is expected to be completed in early JJT79159 MU125-1.1 • Samantha Orduno November 10, 1994 Page 2 January. The Supreme Court, in all likelihood, would then hold a hearing on the case and issue its ruling shortly thereafter. Although it is difficult to predict exactly when the Supreme Court would rule, I would expect that it would be sometime in the first few months of 1995. Because of the uncertainty surrounding the constitutionality of the term limits issue, the council could direct the city clerk not to file the charter amendment until the Supreme Court has issued its decision in the City of Minneapolis case. I have enclosed a draft resolution for the city council to adopt if it chooses this option. Please feel free to call me If you ,b.ave any questions. Sincerely, James . Thomson JJT:jes Enclosure JJT79159 MU125-11 w RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK NOT TO FILE CHARTER AMENDMENT CONCERNING TERM LIMITS WHEREAS, at the November 8, 1994 election, a ballot proposition pertaining to limiting the number of terms that the mayor and city council members may hold was adopted by the voters; WHEREAS, the Minnesota Attorney General has concluded that a term limits provision such as the one adopted at the November 8, 1994 election violates the Minnesota Constitution; WHEREAS, a case involving the City of Minneapolis is currently pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court that will address the constitutionality of term limits; WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 410.11 requires the city clerk to file a copy of the charter amendment with the Secretary of State and County Recorder; WHEREAS, the city council must provide for the orderly administration of justice and insure that the Mounds View City Charter does not contain any unconstitutional provisions; NOW, T-I EREFORE,-BE-I-T_i,ESOL_V_ED B_Y THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY COUNCIL that the city clerk is directed not to file the charter amendment that was passed on November 8, 1994 until the Supreme Court has issued a final ruling as to the constitutionality of term limits in the case that is presently pending before it involving the City of Minneapolis. Jerry Linke, Mayor (ATTEST) (SEAL) Samantha Orduno, City Administrator JJT79264 MU125-11 � - w Fax Transmittal Cover Sheet To: Clerk-Admin. Samantha Orduno, - City of Mounds View From: Duane McCarty, McCarty Volunteer Committee Fax Number: 784-6074 Date: Thu, Oct 20, 1994 . 11 :33 PM Transmitting (2) pages, including cover sheet. If there is difficulty with this transmission, please call: 784-6074 McCarty Volunteer Committee - 784-6074 - Created: Thursday, October 20, 1994 11:33 PM - Page 1 of 1 October 20, 1994 Samantha Orduno, Clerk-Administrator City of Mounds View Dear Sam: I received your phone message regarding a pro term-limits article late this afternoon. Unfortunately you had to leave for an out-of-town meeting before I could respond. As you know, I agreed to write a proponent position for the City Newsletter at Len Burgers request. Len had approached me before the last Charter Commission meeting. I assumed at the time that Charter Commissioners would receive notification during the meeting. It is strict policy that the Commissioners approve Charter Commission releases. There are no exceptions to this rule, even to the extent that the Chairperson' s annual report to the Chief Judge of District Court is presented to the Commissioners first. Such notice did not happen during a long and intense work session. It was early this week before either Len or I had time, within our busy schedules, to fully consider the ramifications of releasing a Charter Commission communication without prior notice to the Commissioners. It was my understanding early this week that Len would express our mutual concern to City Hall for a possible remedy and get back to me. Another option suggested by Len would be that I write a proponent article and Laurie Schley could write the opponent position under a commission disclaimer. I am not comfortable writing a political position, as a private citizen, in the official city newsletter. It must be considered whether such precedence is appropriate. Where does that stop? What may the future costs be? What real service will Mounds View citizens already bombarded by political rhetoric in other media gain? I welcomed the opportunity to provide some history on the Charter Commission recommendation for a term-limit amendment. Unfortunately, the proper method seems to have escaped us in the busyness of the day. I have prepared an article should you have a resolution that neither Len nor I have identified. Please advise me accordingly. Sincerely, k)101414LiaW160.0049 8060 Long Lake Rd. Mounds View POSITION PAPER BY LAURIE OHMANN SCHLEY OPPOSITION TO TERM LIMITS The proposed charter amendment on terms limits doesn't quite mean we "throw the bums out" as popular as that might be. It limits a willing citizen's ability to serve the public in a city office to eight years. That doesn't mean eight years as Councilmember and maybe eight more as Mayor. It's eight years in his or her lifetime. Many of us on the Charter Commission do not believe in term limits and would like you to consider these points before you vote. Term limits may violate the Minnesota Constitution by locally imposing restrictions on who can serve in an elected office. Many lawyers agree that only the Legislature can change the re- quirement on who can serve in elected office. Term limits restricts the choice we have about who we want to represent us in City Hall. If someone has served us well for eight years, we can no longer choose to have that person's expertise and leadership serve us. After eight years, we can't choose based on purpose. We are forced to choose just for a different name. It takes a lot of time and energy for our leaders to become familiar with complex budgets, personnel issues, state mandates, and other key topics. This orientation comes largely from the City Staff. These people are employed, not elected. We ask them to perform important duties; we don't ask them to be accountable for the taxpayer's voice. Consider how much stronger their voices might be if they are the constant voice at City Hall. Term limits suggest that the very people we elected are to blame for all of our discontent. Let's take our own share of the blame and use the term limit power we already have — the power of the vote. Don't give up, via term limits, the power many people literally gave their lives for us to have. Instead, begin breaking the gridlock by re-electing those who produce results for our city and defeat those who aren't. Take five of your neighbors to the polls. Afterthe-election,-speak_up_by phone,Jax, orle_ttcr to your city officials. Tell them what you want from City Hall over and over again. With that kind of dialogue, we can do more for the voice of democracy than term limits ever could. I urge you to Vote NO on the charter amendment. MOUNDS VIEW CHARTER COMMISSION (15 members) The following members terms expire October 31, 1994 PRESENT ELIGIBLE TO SERVE NAME TERM STATUS ANOTHER TERM Bardwell, Lloyd L. 2nd no Hankner, Susan 2nd no Long, David L. 1st yes Toborg, Robert E. 2nd no Trude, Julie A. 1st yes Vandeveer, Raymond J. 1st yes Werdien, Arlene 2nd no expire.94