HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002-2-7 City Attorney Letter to Commission re Charter IssuesSJR-209854v1
MU210-4
SCOTT J. RIGGS
Attorney at Law
Direct Dial (612) 337-9260
Email: sriggs@kennedy-graven.com
February 7, 2002
Jonathan J. Thomas, Chair
Mounds View Charter Commission
2401 Highway 10
Mounds View, MN 55112
RE: Various City of Mounds View Charter Issues
Dear Jonathan:
The following are my observations, comments and suggestions regarding the Mounds View City
Charter and Mounds View Charter Commission issues for which you have requested my review.
The information is based upon my initial review of Minnesota case law, statutes, opinions of the
Minnesota attorney general, discussions with various attorneys that work with city charters and
charter commissions, as well as our conversations regarding these matters. The observations,
comments and suggestions are provided as an initial step in assisting the Charter Commission and
the City of Mounds View in a review of the Mounds View Charter and any further action the
Commissioners or City may desire to pursue. I will also be forwarding a copy of this
correspondence to the City Clerk/Administrator for discussion and comment from the Mounds
View City Council.
Section 10 of the Charter and Section 11 of the Charter.
I have made an initial review of both of these chapters, as well as a review of how other city
charters and charter commissions have addressed provisions such as these, which are largely
supplanted by state statute. Prior to suggesting specific language for each of these chapters, I
recommend a detailed review and comparison of these chapters to state statutes to determine if any
elements of these chapters should be retained. I am aware of another charter commission that has
conducted such and exercise and found it rather enlightening as to potential revisions. While I
could provide sample language from some of the charters I have reviewed, I do not believe this
would provide you with the most useful information regarding these issues. Please let me know
how you would like to proceed regarding these two chapters.
Jonathan Thomas
February 7, 2002
Page 2
SJR-209854v1
MU210-4
Section 5.08 of the Charter—Recall.
As you may recall, Sections 5.05 and 5.07 of the Charter were recently revised by ordinance to
make these Charter provisions consistent with Minnesota court interpretations of the applicability of
initiative and referendum charter sections. Likewise, footnote language was added to Charter
Section 4.02, subdivision 2 as to the unconstitutional and unenforceable nature of terms limits. It
appears that similar clarification is now being suggested for Section 5.08 as to recall of elected
officers. My initial suggestion is that all references to recall authority in Chapter 5 of the Charter be
entirely removed, rather than including a footnote similar to the language accompanying Charter
Section 4.02, subdivision 2. This suggestion is made because nothing is gained by retaining the
recall provision in the Charter beyond the authority that already exists in the Minnesota
Constitution. If instead a footnote is desired, one similar to the term limit footnote, referencing the
Minnesota case of Jacobsen v. Nagel, 96 N.W.2d 569 (Minn. 1959), should be included. As was
the case for the initiative and referendum charter provisions, a recommendation from the Charter
Commission for revising this Charter section by ordinance would seem to be the most expedient and
cost effective method to clarify this section. I suggest raising this matter with the City Council to
determine the viability of this revision.
Section 12.13 of the Charter—Newsletter.
Section 12.13 of the Charter contains language not generally found in the other city charters that I
have reviewed or discussed with others. Such provisions as to administrative functions might be
considered beyond the generally organic nature of a charter, which is in essence the constitution of
the City. The newsletter provision, while a laudable administrative function of the City, is generally
that, an administrative function that has been set forth in detail in the Charter, but is left to the
discretion of the governing body. While most likely being very difficult to enforce in the event no
newsletter is actually published, if a newsletter is published six times a year by the City of Mounds
View, this Charter provision is satisfied.
You had requested a suggestion as to how Section 12.13 might be interpreted, or how some
parameters/guidelines might be utilized by the City as to the content to be contained in the
newsletter. Such a request, which is a policy rather than legal question, is probably better addressed
directly to the City Council. However, it should be pointed out that a newsletter generally cannot
be used as a lobbying statement of the City or a commission (the city has some commissions that
have some authority autonomous from that of the City Council, e.g., Economic Development
Authority, Police Civil Service Commission, Charter Commission), however, it certainly can,
within reason, be a useful tool for providing information to the public. Cost issues and limited
space obviously preclude the inclusion and the conveying of every bit of information that passes
through City offices and departments; this is a budgeting constraint the City must deal with in
modifying or adopting a policy for materials to be included within the newsletter.
Jonathan Thomas
February 7, 2002
Page 3
SJR-209854v1
MU210-4
Section 6.02, subdivision 3 of the Charter—Reports.
I am in receipt of the Charter Commission’s January 10, 2001, correspondence regarding
Section 6.02, subd. 3 of the Charter. I will forward a copy of this correspondence with this letter to
the City Clerk-Administrator for possible further direction from the City Council as to this matter.
As I previously noted, the above discussion constitutes my initial comments on these various issues
involving the Mounds View City Charter. As a follow-up to these initial comments, I would
suggest a meeting between members of the Charter Commission and the City Council to continue
the open dialogue between both entities, review of the Charter’s various provisions and possible
amendments, and to foster a continued, solid working relationship between the Charter Commission
and City Council on the various issues that have been raised, or may be reviewed in the future.
Please feel free to contact me to discuss these matters further.
Very truly yours,
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, CHARTERED
Scott J. Riggs
Mounds View City Attorney
SJR:jms
cc: Kathleen Miller