The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCouncil Resolutions Referencing the Charter7'ltr fo]lowing writton rnNn!istinn (wh1r9h wmr; rvad in till 1) (tlir' roodltr(i of which was wit), by tit,r,nitTihil-- ronr:ri-it) and nrivea els adOpLiO1i11" lf,LSOLUT ION 140. 1,39 RBOOLUTIM' GHTtIRMINING: THU DEMlitM11LYTY OF MUM $1,400,000 GGNrRAt, 0ALIGATTON PARR GUNDS AND 1NCRAA0111 + THU ANNUAL TAX ). VY POR PARK l4AINTENANCF PURPLll ESE FROVIDING FOR AN ELECTION THLREON ANP ON GRWINANCE NO. 362 OF THE CITY 110 IT RI:OOLVED by the City council of th" City of Mounds Vi'aw, Mi"+ra a, .ns fol lowe- ! 1, The City a unetl here=by finds, deierminfs and 4volares Lh&L it Is do®irablfrr, and 3 n tv bent i ntarept.a of �_.i:i►►sbita tire_. to pl_�uiro :ant-. consimorcr a-.-. rants and equipment for parkswithin the City anis to iNAUL . _ aw"ral. Obligation, OOMA a Of. the City in an amount not to It ill alasdste�nined is be neree essay and desirable tet increase - _..._....- + •aF►!}�ia t**-dejvy*� 91 -th#.- city- an" ja`�iftunt n(toy- -to--4 ti�s{d..... .......- r_ U ___._ 4WOn parks, pa hind! and, related public racri- Girtijijil �a�a AsA Shoe t - >An �1X+it#t�.t�1b�'-;# �J f►I11difG1�fi1 �4l�tl�e(r, �id4't��l� ��J.� fir] :�T• a� � - _ -� —aJktldi�— _.: li . �!� $it�e#daffy+, - !$ui�i�.. U i9_#1, ' be thtr : �tqu�M-� � -s �� —1*!l.,inr r - reigar�e1:,q. pisia_W_ i+a_ �r A ai $ all iiauih — -� 7 . .t ttef�l:io�lFl #fie �� . �o _ t fth the referendum question relating to Ordinance Fie. 303 of � •� the City, _. ® - l... 9urnmant to_t 1i1►'�;; % 1I± -of.the t�►i _atirv. _ 00.�Raitm Of 1144-1 __-t-g6tti0hill -at said electing alter be --- siwn by ni—Di o pu�Iitsktign os� this %� sten �n 3n tits a s _ o 1iiit once, 1fO'f: loss ti`#al1 fifteen (13) daysbefore the di lt _ �!. �ni•.ion, and by posting said notice lit. at leli"t � one vublic place in each precinct, ajeo at least fifteen (is) ---- -- _ a I"l;Or to a olsritiinit dater Said- notice a1ia3-1 :.. stantially the following f6ft, r� y 4. vuYnudnt- tri mir,nnn,tn t:tnt-uty du.5. Itr jAnd 205. 16 (3) , Mai Cjtrk-AdmJtniatratat g►yajj algLp ptrat � aaPj Of thy+ sAr'Vo u bAllot at each Polling Piac6, a'Id it] hirs OffiCO, both at wast four (4) days before n4id election and shall further have said sample ballet )aitbl.i.a)ted i1► the official newspaper at hast uaven (i) days before xni(1 - alaCtion. bu MAJOV16 1+411Wt ahall bu ir; fi-lLrtantl-ally thu fullowing fornii ` j =''_-_ - - - _ - -_ -- ter' _ - • - - ---- - Thi C 4.i� �l eL_; •"" „'�' i �: uuc' d1 r0Ctdd tO r,auea to Print c -d rdf f i fr)r tltc- ut:G of the v6text3 at said elertior�, wlj:inh �l;nl; 1�E i.c3�ntia7 in fin m with the PAMPIU 17 -Allot in p.mr-agitiph 4 ..boyo, cxeel-t that l 13(1 ph k b the ac/ Saln.er rnrrf+fiT1 �n Ilnt-t"�� t.i:t' V:J:'.iu "iii "..a,•... w.e+._... 9LUCTION BALLOT", the 4ate Of tho e-iecti-ons a fac13imJl0 ll.greaeura of tht Cit;, -1";k-P.dndnirt.r(,vnr Anri )in( -.r. for tim initioln Of twQ judges. All municipal que=st iant of whatever Mature ujibmi#tad to thin vo>;ers of sai c vjonti.an ohall bc; printed On one separate blue colored ballet and tb* question a toted in the above sample bond ballet shall be tho fir$t queeaLion, if More than one question i s submit tech at Nei A e>wl,eeytiOtl 6. The pn111ng Places f0V each psfaif- t far - eJoctiaA and the elegtion officialfe for ehv> p011ing place *hall be as eeat;ablishad for thry gehaWfil 016600m: - : - i.: i. �'i' f �. t � i, ri•r-f' 1 ii:: 'r 1:f•.4 'f• I1 i,.� i']'rr i:i t,�,;,,.z1;.- `.'It:e:, t"IPS^:r:;._n.i•r NOTICE IS NGRI;liY GIVEN that n "I)OCiAl Olect iron will be field zn a.na for the City of Mi,%snda Vioa, Mirlt1cp0ta, nri T11haday, thv tt;t h rine Ot Ali nutit , 1981 , :,r iwt.fjj ihn hours Of 7100 11.1n. and Hi DO p.m., at whici, ult:c*inn tl1e following questions Will hu taul,ir' tti.d QUkSTlUN NO, 1 Shull MOUnd6 VJOW htdindrot No 303 be allowed to go )nto nffpc•t'7 $hall the City of Moundt view hq authari.wed to iaaue Gancral Obligation, 0ono, in an mmunti not to exceed 61,400,000 t® f.tramee : park improvemcntmt - - _ 43STION X10. 9 Zf qSQ .ti0#J ;s;., z_ i ;_ � + �uy-u4 #hull _t:�c_. — .t:_-... 1 �lOixtdll Vi4 t ba then avthc r1Yrld to in�t%*4sS -- — -- — -- terata-�ir,�mi► mit pa wi pa Wrap ."a rd-",q-tttd- - — --- - -- iii zwervat tonal feciii tim in _ t ilayt t r . AdjuttmAt to1 -L�i r t d- r minno► Wt# -f vita Sa one 1�S� D -p ,to 2.75.3IT; - - A11 registered and;quahified voters of tlie: aity mm .. MWItd to 'trots at $$Aid election within t:hw lre#"ctivt4 . l,e0 —94 MMI_ tl to an tirhifih tis�y atriti.� ca #Ca;i ' sti�4 q nwrill _ �'- DAT;SD Chis i7t da ut .Tul - - q -- By bai" dr Tim aft 44w," Donald aauiey City clock-Adauniatrator • 1 RESOLUTION NO. 4635 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING THE FORM OF THE CITY PORTION OF THE NOVEMBER 8, 1994 GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT WHEREAS, the City has been requested by the Charter Commission to place on the November 8, 1994 General Election Ballot a question pertaining to term limits; and WHEREAS, the City Council, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 410.12, Subdivision 4, has the authority to "fix the form of the ballot". NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City Council in and for the City of Mounds View does hereby fix the November 8, 1994 General Election Ballot to be in the form as designated herein as Exhibit A, attached hereto. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council does hereby direct the Clerk Administrator to notify all required County officials of the City of Mounds View's intent to include on the ballot the language outlined in Exhibit A. Adopted this 12th day of September, 1994. ATTEST: �_. Mayor/ (SEAL): Clerk-Admi ' trator EXHIBIT A QUESTION TO BE PLACED ON NOVEMBER 8, 1994 BALLOT FOR CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW (Revised language by the Charter Commission at 9/12/94 Meeting) CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA SHALL SECTION 4.02 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO ADD THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS? SUBDIVISION 2. TERM LIMITS. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, no person may file to be a candidate for election to a term that would cause the person to serve more than eight total years in the office of Mayor or in the office of City Councilmember combined. SUBDIVISION 3. Service before January 1, 1995 shall not count toward determining total length of service. SUBDIVISION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any part of this section shall be declared unconstitutional by a court, all others shall remain in full force and effect. NO YES �J • C� • RESOLUTION NO. 4663 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 Councilmembers may hold was adopted by the voters; and 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; and WHEREAS, a case involving the City of Minneapolis is currently pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court that will address the constitutionality of term limits; and 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; and 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, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by 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. ATTEST: (SEAL) Adopted this 14th day of November, 1994. erryxinke, Mayor Sam4ntha drduno, City Administrator i RESOLUTION NO. CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY i STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION ORDERING AN ADVISORY ELECTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 4.04 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY CHARTER AND PROVIDING FOR ELECTION PROCEDURES WHEREAS, Section 4.04 of the Mounds View City Charter ("Charter") authorizes the Mounds View City Council ("Council") to order a special or advisory election and to provide all means for holding such an election; and WHEREAS, the Council desires to hold a non-binding, advisory election pursuant to Section 4.04 of the Charter to gather input from City voters on the future use and development of the Bel Rae site; and WHEREAS, the Council desires to maximize voter participation in such an advisory election' by making voting as convenient as possible; and WHEREAS, consistent with the Charter which grants the Council the authority to provide all means for holding an advisory election, the Council desires to allow voters to vote on a Saturday to avoid work schedules conflicting with the advisory election and to increase voter turnout; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council hereby orders an advisory election on the future use and development of the Bel Rae site pursuant to Section 4.04 of the Charter; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk -Administrator is hereby directed to schedule the advisory election for &PI L S"_ , 1997, and give notice of the advisory election at least 15 days prior to the election by posting notice of the advisory election in the City's election precinct and publishing a notice of the advisory election at least once in the City's official newspaper stating the date, time, and location(s) of the advisory election; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk -Administrator is authorized and directed to prepare the ballot for the advisory election, in a form substantially similar to the ballot i form attached thereto and incorporated herein by reference, and take all other necessary steps for holding the advisory election, including the administration of a polling place at the City's election precinct and any additional polling locations the City Clerk -Administrator may designate; and . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the election results shall be made available to the public as soon as is practicable following the advisory election and presented to the Council at its first meeting following the advisory election. RCL128939 I Sanas-so 1 I Adopted this 10th day of March, 1997. i 2 � Duane mcciii7y. mayor I ATTEST; w` Chuck Whiting, City Clerk -Administrator (S.F-AL) R=1Y839 MM25-90 2 • RESOLUTION NO. 5150 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION DECLARING A VACANCY TO EXIST IN THE OFFICE OF CITY COUNCIL AND SETTING THE DATE FOR SPECIAL ELECTION TO FILL VACANCY FOR NOVEMBER 4,1997. WHEREAS, Council Member Julie Trude has submitted her resignation in writing filed with the City Clerk -Administrator effective September 1, 1997; and WHEREAS, Section 2.05 of the Mounds View City Charter ("City Charter") states that vacancy of the Council, whether it be in the office of Mayor or City Council Member, shall be deemed to exist in the case of resignation in writing filed with the City Clerk -Administrator and requiring that the City Council shall by resolution declare the vacancy to exist; and WHEREAS; Section 4.05, Subd, 1, City Charter, states that when a vacancy in an elected office of the City occurs with 365 days or more remaining in the term of the vacated office, there • should be a special election held within 90 days after the vacancy occurs to elect a successor to serve the remainder of the unexpired term of the office vacated; and WHEREAS; Section 4.05, Subd. 2, City Charter, requires that the City Clerk -Administrator shall give at least 60 days published prior notice of such a special election; and WHEREAS, Section 4.02 of the City Charter states that no earlier than 70 nor later than 56 days before any municipal election, any resident of the City qualified under state law for elective office may, by filing an affidavit and by paying a filing fee to the City Clerk -Administrator in an amount as set by ordinance, have their name placed on the municipal election ballot. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, that the Council declares a vacancy to exist in the Office of City Council as of September 1, 1997, by virtue of Council Member Julie Trude's filing her resignation in writing with the City Clerk - Administrator pursuant to Section 2.05 of the City Charter. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to Section 4.05, Subd. 1 of the City Charter, the Council directs that a special election be held on November 4, 1997, which is within 90 days after the vacancy occurred to elect a successor to serve the remainder of the unexpired term of Council Member Julie Trude; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk -Administrator is directed to give at least • 60 days published prior notice of the special election pursuant to Section 4.05, Subd. 2 of the City Charter; and • BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that pursuant to Section 4.02 of the City Charter, filing for office for the special election shall open no earlier than 70 days nor later than 56 days prior to November 4, 1997. The City Clerk -Administrator is authorized to take all steps necessary to conduct the special election pursuant to the City Charter. Adopted this 11th day of August, 1997. Ro er Koopmeiner Acting Mayor ATTEST: Ux( ' ' Chuck Whiting, City Jerk -Administrator (SEAL) • 0 RESOLUTION NO. 5150 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LEASE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW AND INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 621 AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK -ADMINISTRATOR TO EXECUTE THE LEASE ON BEHALF OF THE CITY WHEREAS, the City Council ("Council") of the City of Mounds View ("City") has previously authorized City staff to enter into negotiations with the Independent School District No. 621 ("School District") to develop the terms of a lease ("Lease") under which School District would lease space from the City in a certain portion of the City's newly developed Mounds View Community Center ("Leased Premises"); and WHEREAS, the City Clerk -Administrator has been negotiating with School District over the past several months regarding the terms of the Lease; and WHEREAS, the City and School District have reached an agreement regarding the terms • of the Lease which call for School District to lease the Leased Premises from the City for renewable five year terms at a base rent of approximately $51,000 per year being paid to the City with inflation adjustments each year; and WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the terms of the proposed Lease as recommended by the City Clerk -Administrator. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council hereby approved the terms of the proposed Lease between the City and School District; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Council hereby authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk -Administrator to execute the Lease with School District on behalf of the City. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Minnesota this 25th day of August, 1997. Duane McCarty, Mayor ATTEST: • r / l C& ' Charles S. Whiting, Cle -Administrator 1 • 9 RESOLUTION NO. 5240 CITY OF MOUNDS 'VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION DETERN UM NG n E PETITION FOR INITIATIVE TO BE INSUFFICIENT WHEREAS, a petition proposing to adopt a resolution by initiative regarding the theater project ("Petition") has been submitted to the City Clerk-Adrninistrator pursuant to Chapter 5 of the Mounds View City Charter; and WHEREAS, Section 5.03 requires the City Clerk -Administrator to examine the Petition as to its sufficiency and report to the Council within 10 days of receipt of the Petition; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk -Administrator has submitted his report to the Council on May 20, 1998 within 10 days as required by Section 5.03 of the City Charter, and WHEREAS, the Mounds view City Council is required by Section 5.03 to determine the sufficiency of the Petition by resolution: and WHEREAS, the recommendations of the City Clerk -Administrator and the City Attorney are that the Petition is insufficient and irregular for the reasons stated in the May 20 City Clerk - Administrator report and the City Attorney's legal opinion. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council, pursuant to Section 5.03 of the Mounds View City Charter, determines the Petition for initiative is insufficient and irregular based upon the recommendations and legal advice of the City Clerk - Administrator and the City Attorney: and be it FURTHER RESOLVED that based on this finding of insufficiency of the Petition, the initiative for a resolution requested by the Petition committee shall not be placed on a ballot of either a special election or a regular City election. Adopted this 26th day of May, 1998. ATTEST: C& 4 Charles- _ W! iting City Cleric -Administrator • • RESOLUTION NO. 5251 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE CORRECTED PETITION FOR INITIATIVE TO BE INSUFFICIENT WHEREAS, a petition proposing to adopt a resolution by initiative regarding the theater project ("Petition") had been submitted to the City Clerk -Administrator and determined by the City Council to be insufficient on May 26, 1998 [Resolution No. 5240]; and WHEREAS, the Sponsoring Committee of the Petition has since acted in attempts to correct the Petition according to Charter Section 5.04 by submitting an additional 149 petitioning signatures verified as satisfactory by the Clerk -Administrator thereby totaling 882 approved signature and surpassing the required 859 signatures; and WHEREAS, the Sponsoring Committee has retained the wording of the original petition which were opined by the City Attorney to be reasons for considering the Petition to be invalid; and WHEREAS, the Clerk -Administrator has reported to the City Council in accordance with Charter Section 5.04 in the letter dated June 29, 1998 that the Sponsoring Committee had submitted the additional signatures; and WHEREAS, Charter Section 5.04 requires the City Council to again find the Petition to be sufficient or insufficient; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney has opined that a petition for initiative pursuant to Chapter 5 of the City Charter is not lawfully applicable to an initiative for a resolution, and that regardless of the language of such Charter provision, such initiative authority must be construed in harmony with and subject to the constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Petition for initiative is for the adoption of a resolution, the City Council is under no obligation to place the initiative resolution on the ballot of either a special election or regular City election; and BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council determines the corrected Petition for initiative to be insufficient based on the recommendation and legal advice of the City Attorney; and be it FURTHER RESOLVED that based on this finding of insufficiency of the Petition, the initiative for a resolution requested by the Petition Sponsoring Committee shall not be placed on either a special election or a regular City election. Adopted this 13th day of July, 1998. ATTEST: Zog:9 oopmeiners, ActiFk Mayor 0 (SEAL): Charles S. Whiting City Clerk -Administrator • LJ RESOLUTiO.N NO. 5478 CITY OF'MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF R;kMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOi.UTION SUBMITTING PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE MOUNDS ViEW CITY CHARTER AT THE NOVEMBER 7, 2000, GENERAi. ELECTION AND FIXING THE FORM OF THE BALLOT FOR SUCH PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 410.12, subd. 5, proposed Ordinances 661 and 662 on .lune 5, 2000, to the Mounds View Charter Commission for consideration; and WHEREAS, the .M.otmds View City Charter Commission considered the amendments proposed by Ordinances 661 and 662 for more than 60 days and did not, before the expiration of the 60 -day period, request additional time to review the proposed anlendnients; and WHEREAS, the City COUn.c1l desires to submit Ordinances 661 and 662 to City voters at the upcoming November 7, 2000, Gencral Election pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 410.12, subd. 4. NOW THEREFORE, B.F., 1'f RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mounds View, pursuant to Minn. Stat. e 410.12, subd. 4 submits to the qualified voters at the November 7, 2000, general election Ordinance No. 661 proposing to amend various chapters of the Mowads Vicw City Charter relating to a City Manager form of government and Ordinai.ice No. 662 proposing to amend Cllapler 2 of the Mounds View City Charter changing the term of office of Mayor from two (2) to four (4) years, and BF, IT FURT11ER RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Mounds View, pursuant to Minn. Stat. ti 410.12, subd. 4, hereby fixes the form of the ballot regarding proposed Ordinances 661 and 662 In the form attached hereto and incorporated herein by re crcnce. Adopted this 11'x' clay of September, 2000. ATTEST (SEAL) W.I.- I S;907% 1 %11:? 1 o --t Dan Coughlin, kX_yo� Rick ,lohkc, Ac ing City Clerk -Administrator CITY QUESTION BALLOT it CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW w GENERAL ELECTION: Tuesday, November 7, 2000 INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS: To vote for the proposed charter amendment blacken the oval ( ) next to the word "YES" fol' the question. To vote against the proposed charter amendment, blacken the oval (_ ) next to tale word "NO" for the question. Use only the pencil provided. RCL -I R59o7 1 \1U210.4 CITY QUESTION #1 CITY CHARTER AMENDMENT RELATING TO FORM OF GOVERNMENT AND ADMINISTRATION (_ _) YES Shall the Mounds View City Charter be amended to: (a) change from the Mayor-COUnCil Plan form of government to the Council -Manager Plan form of government; (b) change and clarify the general form of administration of the City to be that of a City Manager; and (c) amend all references to Clerk - Administrator to City Manager? �) NO CITY QUESTION #2 CITY CHARTER AMENDMENT RELATING TO TERM OF OFFICE FOR MAYOR (_) YES Shall the Mounds View City Charter be aniended to change the term of office for the office of mayor from a two-year term to a four year term? (_) NO RESOLUTION NO. 6608 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE SUFFICIENCY OF REFERENDUM PETITION PURSUANT TO CITY CHARTER; FINDING THE REFERENDUM QUESTION INVALID; AND DECLARING THAT SUCH QUESTION SHALL NOT BE CERTIFIED FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION WHEREAS, Section 5.07 of the Mounds View City Charter provides that an ordinance adopted by the City Council may be subjected to a petition for a referendum prior to the date when the ordinance takes effect; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 760 which is scheduled to take effect on August 19, 2005, pursuant to the Mounds View City Charter; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 5 of the Mounds View City Charter a petition for a referendum as to Ordinance No. 760 has been received by the City; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Mounds View City Charter, City staff has reviewed and determined that the petition submitted to the City is insufficient because the City Clerk/Administrator has reviewed and determined that the petition submitted to the City is insufficient due to the fact that the number of valid signatures was less than the required number; and WHEREAS, the referendum petition seeks a vote as to the final adoption of Ordinance No. 760 which authorizes the sale of real property by the City of Mounds View to the Mounds View Economic Development Authority; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received an opinion from the City Attorney which is attached and set forth as Exhibit A to this resolution and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the City Attorney that an ordinance dealing with the sale of land is an administrative act (among other reasons) of the City Council that is not subject to referendum pursuant to Minnesota law. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View that the recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Resolution as if fully set forth herein; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby finds the petition initially submitted on August 15, 2005, requesting a vote as to the adoption of Ordinance No. 760 to be insufficient because City Clerk/Administrator has reviewed and determined that the petition submitted to the City is insufficient due to the fact that the number of valid signatures was less than the required number pursuant to the Mounds View City Charter; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council hereby finds that the question posed in such referendum petition is manifestly invalid; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council hereby finds that the question posed in such referendum petition will not be placed on the ballot of a future City special election; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that City staff is authorized to take all necessary action consistent with the City Charter and State law to inform the petitioners of the findings of the City Council as to the referendum petition submitted concerning Ordinance No. 760. Approved by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 22nd day of August, 2005. ZZ6--e— 01 Rob Marty, Mayor ATTEST: Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator (seal) EXHIBIT A OPINION OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY ATTORNEY CHARTERED 470 US Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 telephone (612) 337-9310 fax hftp://www.kennedy-graven.com sriggs@kennedy-graven, com MEMORANDUM DATE: August 11, 2005 TO: Mounds View City Council Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator FROM: Mary D. Tietjen Scott J. Riggs RE: Transfer of Property from City to EDA Referendum Issues This memorandum addresses the legal issues related to a potential referendum challenging the transfer of property from the City of Mounds View ("City") to the Mounds View Economic Development Authority ("EDA") for the Medtronic Development Project ("Project"). A key question is whether the City Council would have legal grounds to deny a referendum petition on the sale of the property and adopt a Resolution authorizing and finalizing the transaction. In my opinion, the City Council has a sufficient legal grounds to do both. Factual Background On July 11, 2005, the Mounds View City Council adopted Ordinance No. 760 authorizing the conveyance of certain property from the City to the EDA. The EDA intends to subsequently convey the property to Medtronic, Inc., for development and construction of an 820,000 square foot office complex pursuant to a purchase agreement and a contract for development between the City, the EDA and Medtronic. Residents have threatened to challenge the City's conveyance of property for the Project pursuant to the power of referendum under Section 5.01 of the City Charter.1 Legal Issues Is the conveyance of property a legislative act subject to referendum? May the City authorize conveyance of the property under Minnesota Statutes sections 471.64 and 465.035, without regard to city charter provisions? III. Does Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462 preempt the city charter referendum provision? Legal Discussion The following are legal arguments that would support a finding by the City Council to deny a petition for referendum on the sale of the property. I. The Conveyance of Property is Not a Legislative Act Subiect to Referendum. The power of referendum is limited to acts which are legislative in character. Hanson v. City of Granite Falls, 529 N.W.2d 485, 487 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995)(citing Oakman v. City of Eveleth, 203 N.W. 514 (1925). To determine whether an ordinance is legislative and subject to a referendum, the courts have distinguished between legislative, administrative and quasi-judicial acts of a city. Id. at 488. In the Oakman case, a taxpayer sought to require the city to hold a referendum on an ordinance authorizing the settlement of a lawsuit against the city. The court found that the ordinance did not enact a law, but was instead the exercise of an administrative function: We think the measure is one that calls for investigation and discretion, and, if such matters are not to be met and handled as a part of the daily routine of business of a municipality, but must be submitted to the people to make a law for each controversy that may arise, we are drifting from the ideals of representative government. In fact, the theory of initiative and referendum was directed at supposed evils of legislation alone ... To allow a referendum to be invoked in order to delay executive conduct would destroy the efficiency necessary to the successful administration of the business affairs of a city. Oakman, 203 N.W. at 517 (emphasis added). The Oakman court also rejected the idea that the matter of awarding a contract is a legislative act: The orders of the city council as to which the referendum is sought in the case at bar are clearly executive and not legislative in their nature. A direction to an officer to sign a specified contract with a named person to do a defined thing for a specified price is not a legislative act... It is not the laying down of a rule, a 1 Section 5.01 reads: "The people of Mounds View reserve to themselves the powers in accordance with the provisions of this Charter to initiate and adopt ordinances and resolutions, to require measures passed by the Council to be referred to the electorate for approval or disapproval, and to recall elected public officials. These powers shall be called the initiative, the referendum, and the recall, respectively." rinciple or a law by which the conduct of a public officer may be guided Id. (emphasis added). General legislative acts lay down some permanent and uniform rule of law, administrative acts relate to daily administration of municipal affairs, and quasi- judicial acts are the product of investigation, consideration and deliberate human judgment based upon evidentiary facts of some sort. Hanson, 529 N.W.2d at 488. The Mounds View City Council adopted an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of real property from the City to the EDA. Although Minnesota courts have not directly held that the sale of real property is an administrative, rather than a legislative act, the case law strongly supports this argument. As an administrative act, the sale of property is not subject to referendum. Moreover, the ordinance authorizing the sale is an ordinance authorizing a contract for the conveyance of property. And, courts have held that entering into a contract is an administrative act. The sale of property does not establish a permanent or uniform rule of law; rather, it is an administrative act that is part of the day-to-day business activities of the City. Also, the fact that the Council authorized the sale by ordinance should not change the conclusion. In the Oakman case, the city adopted an ordinance approving a settlement and the court, nonetheless, held that the ordinance was the exercise of an administrative function. If administrative acts, such as the sale of property, were subject to referendum, it would defeat not only the purpose of referendum, but make it highly impractical and inefficient for the City to conduct its daily business affairs. Under the case law, a court would likely find that the sale of real property is an administrative, not a legislative, act. Thus, the ordinance authorizing the sale is not subject to referendum and the City Council may deny the sufficiency of a petition on this basis. II. State Law Allows the City to Convey Property Without Regard to City Charter Provisions. Two state statutes provide support for this argument A. Minn. Stat. § 471.64. The first statute, Minn. Stat. § 471.64, authorizes the City to enter into a contract for the sale of real property to another political subdivision without regard to charter provisions; Any county, city, town.... or other political subdivision of the state may enter into any contract with . . . any other political subdivision of the state for the purchase, lease, sale.... of real property, without regard to statutory or charter provisions ... (emphasis added). Minnesota courts have not had an opportunity to construe this statute. However, the Attorney General concluded in two opinions that a city may disregard charter or statutory procedural requirements when entering into a contract with another governmental entity. In both cases, the Attorney General decided that a city could disregard statutory and charter bidding provisions when entering into a contract for the purchase of electricity from the federal government. See Op.Atty.Gen., 59-A-15, March 30, 1965; Op.Atty.Gen., 59-A-15, July 7, 1945. Section 12.05 of the Mounds View Charter that provides that "[n]o real property of the City shall be disposed of except by ordinance." However, section 471.64 authorizes the City to enter into a contract for the sale of property to the EDA without regard to the city charter. Although the City Council complied with the charter and adopted an ordinance authorizing the conveyance, Minn. Stat. § 471.64 provides authority for the Council to adopt a resolution authorizing staff to finalize conveyance of the property to the EDA. B. Minn. Stat. § 465.035. The second statute that supports the argument that the conveyance of property is not subject to charter requirements is Minn. Stat. § 465.035. That section provides: Any county, town, city or other public corporation may lease or convey its lands for a nominal consideration, without consideration or for such consideration as may be agreed upon to the state or to any governmental subdivision ... for public use when authorized by its governing body. The Minnesota Supreme Court addressed this statute in County of Hennepin v. City of Hopkins, 58 N.W.2d 851 (Minn. 1953). In that case, Hennepin County conveyed property to the village of Hopkins for park and recreation purposes. After the deed had been recorded, the county brought an action to invalidate the conveyance based on the failure to comply with a statute requiring the adoption and publication of a resolution defining the terms of the sale, a bond, and other specific requirements. The court held, however, that Minn. Stat. § 465.035 trumped the requirements in the other statute and that the county was permitted to convey the property without complying with the other statute. See id. at 855. The City in this case has authorized conveyance of property to the EDA for a public purpose. Under the Court's holding in County of Hennepin, Minn. Stat. § 465.035 would trump the City's charter requirements. Thus, the City may adopt a resolution authorizing staff to finalize conveyance of the property to the EDA, despite the ordinance requirement in the charter. Under this same reasoning, a court could also find that, in a conveyance of property from one public entity to another, section 465.035 trumps the referendum provision in the city charter. III. Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462 Preempts the Charter Referendum Provision. The City may also be able to argue that the conveyance and redevelopment of property is governed by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462, and, therefore, Chapter 462 preempts the referendum provision in the charter. City charters provisions must be consistent with and are subject to state law. See State ex rel Town of Lowell v. City of Crookston, 252 Minn. 526, 91 N.W.2d 81, 83 (1958). The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently held that the procedures set forth in chapter 462 for adopting and implementing laws for land use planning preempt charter provisions reserving the right of referendum to voters to approve or disapprove land use ordinances. See Nordmarken v. City of Richfield, 641 N.W.2d 343 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). In Nordmarken, a private redeveloper submitted a plan to the City of Richfield that required both a rezoning and an amendment to the city's comprehensive plan. The council adopted the necessary ordinances to allow the plan to go forward. A group of citizens petitioned the council for referendum on the rezoning and comp plan ordinances. The court of appeals held that a referendum would be in conflict with the state law and that state law preempted the charter with respect to land use issues. Although Nordmarken did not deal with the conveyance of property, the same rationale may be applicable. Chapter 462 addresses the acquisition and disposal of property in furthering the planning goals of a city. First, section 462.353, subd. 3, authorizes a municipality to enter into contracts with other public or private agencies in furtherance of the planning activities authorized in sections 462.351 to 462.364. Next, Minn. Stat. § 462.356 addresses the acquisition and disposal of property in the context of a city's comprehensive plan: After a comprehensive municipal plan ... has been recommended by the planning agency and a copy filed with the governing body, no publicly owned interest in real property within the municipality shall be acquired or disposed of.... until after the planning agency has reviewed the proposed acquisition.... and reported in writing to the governing body ... its findings as to compliance of the proposed acquisition, disposal or improvement with the comprehensive municipal plan. Section 462.356 requires that a city follow a specific process before selling property to ensure that the proposed sale is in compliance with the comprehensive plan. To subject the findings approving or authorizing a sale to referendum would usurp the process set forth in state statute. Also, the City has complied with section 462.356. The planning commission reviewed the ordinance authorizing the sale of property from the City to the EDA and reported to the City Council. Because state law governs the disposal of public property and the City has complied with that law, an argument can be made that the charter provision subjecting the City ordinance to referendum is preempted under the court's rationale in Nordmarken. Conclusion The City Council has several bases upon which to deny the sufficiency of a referendum petition on the sale of property from the City to the EDA. First, entering into a contract for the sale of property is an administrative, not a legislative, act and therefore is not subject to referendum. Second, state law authorizes the City to convey property to another governmental entity without regard to city charter provisions. Although the City Council has adopted an ordinance authorizing the sale, it is not prohibited from also adopting a resolution to authorize staff to finalize the transaction. Finally, an argument can be made that the state law governing land use planning and the disposal of public property preempts the referendum provision in the city charter. Thus, based upon the above -discussed rationale, it is recommended that any referendum petition received by the City regarding the sale of property from the City to the EDA be denied as insufficient. In addition to the City's involvement in this matter, the city council should also keep in mind that other parties, including Medtronic, may be able to challenge the sufficiency of any referendum petition or potential election based upon the above - referenced case law, statutes and discussion. RESOLUTION NO. 6649 • CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF R.AMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION DETERMINING THE SUFFICIENCY OF REFERENDUM PETITION PURSUANT TO CITY CHARTER; PROVIDING FOR THE DISPOSITION OF SAID PETITION; FINDING THE REFERENDUM QUESTION INVALID; AND DECLARING THAT SUCH QUESTION SHALL NOT BE CERTIFIED FOR A SPECIAL ELECTION WHEREAS, Section 5.07 of the Mounds View City Charter provides that an ordinance:. adopted by the City Council may be subjected to a petition for a referendum prior to the date when the ordinance takes effect; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 760 which was scheduled to take effect on August 19, 2005, pursuant to the Mounds View City Charter; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 5 of the Mounds View City Charter a petition for a referendum as to Ordinance No. 760 has been received by the City; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Mounds View City Charter, City staff previously reviewed and determined that the petition submitted to the City was insufficient because the number of valid signatures submitted was less than the required number; and WHEREAS, the referendum petition seeks a vote as to the final adoption of Ordinance No. 760 which authorizes the transfer of real property by the City of Mounds View to the Mounds View Economic Development Authority; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received an opinion from the City Attorney which is attached and set forth as Exhibit A to this resolution and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, it is the opinion of the City Attorney that an ordinance dealing with the sale of land is an administrative act (among other reasons) of the City Council that is not subject to referendum pursuant to Minnesota law; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted Resolution No. 6608, wherein the City Council determined the sufficiency of referendum petition pursuant to the Mounds View City Charter, provided for the disposition of said petition, found that the referendum question was invalid, and declared that such question should not be certified for a special election; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Mounds View City Charter, additional signatures were submitted on September 26, 2005, regarding the petition for a referendum, bringing the total to 997 valid signatures; and SJR -268835v3 MU205-30 • WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted Resolution No. 6581 on July 11, 2005, authorizing the transfer of real property by the City of Mounds View to the Mounds View Economic Development Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 465.035 and Minnesota • Statute Section 471.64. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Mounds View that the recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Resolution as if fully set forth herein; and L BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby finds the petition initially submitted on August 15, 2005, and supplemented on September 26, 2005, requesting a vote as to the adoption of Ordinance No. 760 includes the requisite number of signatures required pursuant to the Mounds View City Charter; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council hereby finds that the question posed in such referendum petition is manifestly invalid and that the ordinance was not necessary based upon the adoption of Resolution No. 6581 and Minnesota Statutes Section 465.035 and Minnesota Statutes Section 471.64, and, therefore the petition is insufficient; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City Council hereby fords that the question posed in such referendum petition will not be placed on the ballot of a future City special election; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that City staff is authorized to take all necessary action consistent with the City Charter and State law to inform the petitioners of the findings of the City Council as to the referendum petition submitted concerning Ordinance No. 760. Approved by the City Council of the City of Mounds View this 3rd day of October, 2005. r' May4r ATTEST: City Clerk -Administrator (seal) SJR -2688350 MU205-30 2 • EXHIBIT A 0 OPINION OF MOUNDS VIEW CITY ATTORNEY 470 US Bank Plaza 200 South Sixth Street Minneapolis MN 55402 (612) 337-9300 telephone II (612) 337-9310 fax h=://,xww.kennedy-eraven.com sriggs@kennedy-graven.com CHARTERED MEMORANDUM DATE: August 11, 2005 TO: Mounds View City Council 40 Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator FROM: Mary D. Tietjen Scott J. Riggs RE: Transfer of Property from City to EDA Referendum Issues This memorandum addresses the legal issues related to a potential referendum challenging the transfer of property from the City of Mounds View ("City") to the Mounds View Economic Development Authority ("EDA") for the Medtronic Development Project ("Project"). A key question is whether the City Council would have legal grounds to deny a referendum petition on the sale of the property and adopt a Resolution authorizing and finalizing the transaction. In my opinion, the City Council has a sufficient legal grounds to do both. Factual Background On July 11, 2005, the Mounds View City Council adopted Ordinance No. 760 authorizing the conveyance of certain property from the City to the EDA. The EDA intends to subsequently convey the property to Medtronic, Inc., for development and construction of an 820,000 square foot office complex pursuant to a purchase agreement and a contract for development between the City, the EDA and Medtronic. Residents have threatened to challenge the City's conveyance SJR -2688350 MU205-30 A-1 • • of property for the Project pursuant to the power of referendum under Section 5.01 of the City Charter! Legal Issues I. Is the conveyance of property a legislative act subject to referendum? II. May the City authorize conveyance of the property under Minnesota Statutes sections 471.64 and 465.035, without regard to city charter provisions? III. Does Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462 preempt the city charter referendum provision? Legal Discussion The following are legal arguments that would support a finding by the City Council to deny a petition for referendum on the sale of the property. I. The Conveyance of Property is Not a Legislative Act Subiect to Referendum. The power of referendum is limited to acts which are legislative in character. Hanson v. City of Granite Falls, 529 N.W.2d 485, 487 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995)(citing Oakman v. City of Eveleth, 203 N.W. 514 (1925). To determine whether an ordinance is legislative and subject to a referendum, the courts have distinguished between legislative, administrative and quasi-judicial acts of a city. Id. at 488. In the Oakman case, a taxpayer sought to require the city to hold a referendum on an ordinance authorizing the settlement of a lawsuit against the city. The court found that the ordinance did not enact a law, but was instead the exercise of an administrative function: We think the measure is one that calls for investigation and discretion, and, if such matters are not to be met and handled as a part of the daily routine of business of a municipality, but must be submitted to the people to make a law for each controversy that may arise, we are drifting from the ideals of representative government. In fact, the theory of initiative and referendum was directed at supposed evils of legislation alone ... To allow a referendum to be invoked in order to delay executive conduct would destroy the efficiency necessary to the successful administration of the business affairs of a city. Oakman, 203 N.W. at 517 (emphasis added). The Oakman court also rejected the idea that the matter of awarding a contract is a legislative act: 1 Section 5.01 reads: "The people of Mounds View reserve to themselves the powers in accordance with the provisions of this Charter to initiate and adopt ordinances and resolutions, to require measures passed by the Council to be referred to the electorate for approval or disapproval, and to recall elected public officials. These powers shall be called the initiative, the referendum, and the recall, respectively." SJR -268835v3 MU205-30 A-2 The orders of the city council as to which the referendum is sought in the case at bar • are clearly executive and not legislative in their nature. A direction to an officer to sign a specified contract with a named person to do a defined thing for a specified price is not a legislative act... It is not the ling down of a rule, a principle or a law by which the conduct of a public officer may be guided. Id. (emphasis added). General legislative acts lay down some permanent and uniform rule of law, administrative acts relate to daily administration of municipal affairs, and quasi-judicial acts are the product of investigation, consideration and deliberate human judgment based upon evidentiary facts of some sort. Hanson, 529 N.W.2d at 488. The Mounds View City Council adopted an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of real property from the City to the EDA. Although Minnesota courts have not directly held that the sale of real property is an administrative, rather than a legislative act, the case law strongly supports this argument. As an administrative act, the sale of property is not subject to referendum. Moreover, the ordinance authorizing the sale is an ordinance authorizing a contract for the conveyance of property. And, courts have held that entering into a contract is an administrative act. The sale of property does not establish a permanent or uniform rule of law; rather, it is an administrative act that is part of the day-to-day business activities of the City. Also, the fact that the Council authorized the sale by ordinance should not change the conclusion. In the Oakman A& case, the city adopted an ordinance approving a settlement and the court, nonetheless, held that the ordinance was the exercise of an administrative function. If administrative acts, such as the sale of property, were subject to referendum, it would defeat not only the purpose of referendum, but make it highly impractical and inefficient for the City to conduct its daily business affairs. • Under the case law, a court would likely find that the sale of real property is an administrative, not a legislative, act. Thus, the ordinance authorizing the sale is not subject to referendum and the City Council may deny the sufficiency of a petition on this basis. H. State Law Allows the City to Convey Property Without Regard to City Charter Provisions. Two state statutes provide support for this argument. A. Minn. Stat. § 471.64. The first statute, Minn. Stat. § 471.64, authorizes the City to enter into a contract for the sale of real property to another political subdivision without regard to charter provisions: Any county, city, town, ... or other political subdivision of the state may enter into any contract with ... any other political subdivision of the state for the purchase, lease, sale, ... of real property, without regard to statutory or charter provisions ... SJR -268835v3 MU205-30 A-3 (emphasis added). Minnesota courts have not had an opportunity to construe this statute. However, the Attorney General concluded in two opinions that a city may disregard charter or statutory procedural requirements when entering into a contract with another governmental entity. In both cases, the Attorney General decided that a city could disregard statutory and charter bidding provisions when entering into a contract for the purchase of electricity from the federal government. See Op.Atty.Gen., 59-A-15, March 30, 1965; Op.Atty.Gen., 59-A-15, July 7, 1945. Section 12.05 of the Mounds View Charter that provides that "[n]o real property of the City shall be disposed of except by ordinance." However, section 471.64 authorizes the City to enter into a contract for the sale of property to the EDA without regard to the city charter. Although the City Council complied with the charter and adopted an ordinance authorizing the conveyance, Minn. Stat. § 471.64 provides authority for the Council to adopt a resolution authorizing staff to finalize conveyance of the property to the EDA. B. Minn. Stat. § 465.035. The second statute that supports the argument that the conveyance of property is not subject to charter requirements is Minn. Stat. § 465.035. That section provides: Any county, town, city or other public corporation may lease or convey its lands for a nominal consideration, without consideration or for such consideration as may be agreed upon to the state or to any governmental subdivision ... for public use when authorized by its governing body. The Minnesota Supreme Court addressed this statute in County of Hennepin v. City of Hopkins, 58 N.W.2d 851 (Minn. 1953). In that case, Hennepin County conveyed property to the village of Hopkins for park and recreation purposes. After the deed had been recorded, the county brought an action to invalidate the conveyance based on the failure to comply with a statute requiring the adoption and publication of a resolution defining the terms of the sale, a bond, and other specific requirements. The court held, however, that Minn. Stat. § 465.035 trumped the requirements in the other statute and that the. county was permitted to convey the property without complying with the other statute. See id. at 855. The City in this case has authorized conveyance of property to the EDA for a public purpose. Under the Court's holding in County of Hennepin, Minn. Stat. § 465.035 would trump the City's charter requirements. Thus, the City may adopt a resolution authorizing staff to finalize conveyance of the property to the EDA, despite the ordinance requirement in the charter. Under this same reasoning, a court could also find that, in a conveyance of property from one public entity to another, section 465.035 trumps the referendum provision in the city charter. SII. Minnesota Statutes Chanter 462 Preempts the Charter Referendum Provision The City may also be able to argue that the conveyance and redevelopment of property is governed by Minnesota Statutes Chapter 462, and, therefore, Chapter 462 preempts the SJR -268835v3 MU205-30 • • referendum provision in the charter. City charters provisions must be consistent with and are subject to state law. See State ex rel _Town of Lowell v. City of Crookston, 252 Minn. 526, 91 N.W.2d 81, 83 (1958). The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently held that the procedures set forth in chapter 462 for adopting and implementing laws for land use planning preempt charter provisions reserving the right of referendum to voters to approve or disapprove land use ordinances. See Nordmarken v. City of Richfield, 641 N.W.2d 343 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). In Nordmarken, a private redeveloper submitted a plan to the City of Richfield that required both a rezoning and an amendment to the city's comprehensive plan. The council adopted the necessary ordinances to allow the plan to go forward. A group of citizens petitioned the council for referendum on the rezoning and comp plan ordinances. The court of appeals held that a referendum would be in conflict with the state law and that state law preempted the charter with respect to land use issues. Although Nordmarken did not deal with the conveyance of property, the same rationale may be applicable. Chapter 462 addresses the acquisition and disposal of property in furthering the planning goals of a city. First, section 462.353, subd. 3, authorizes a municipality to enter into contracts with other public or private agencies in furtherance of the planning activities authorized in sections 462.351 to 462.364. Next, Minn. Stat. § 462.356 addresses the acquisition and disposal of property in the context of a city's comprehensive plan: After a comprehensive municipal plan ... has been recommended by the planning agency and a copy filed with the governing body, no publicly owned interest in real property within the municipality shall be acquired or disposed of, ... until after the planning agency has reviewed the proposed acquisition, ... and reported in writing to the governing body ... its findings as to compliance of the proposed acquisition, disposal or improvement with the comprehensive municipal plan. Section 462.356 requires that a city follow a specific process before selling property to ensure that the proposed sale is in compliance with the comprehensive plan. To subject the findings approving or authorizing a sale to referendum would usurp the process set forth in state statute. Also, the City has complied with section 462.356. The planning commission reviewed the ordinance authorizing the sale of property from the City to the EDA and reported to the City Council. Because state law governs the disposal of public property and the City has complied with that law, an argument can be made that the charter provision subjecting the City ordinance to referendum is preempted under the court's rationale in Nordmarken. Conclusion The City Council has several bases upon which to deny the sufficiency of a referendum petition on the sale of property from the City to the EDA. First, entering into a contract for the sale of property is an administrative, not a legislative, act and therefore is not subject to referendum. Second, state law authorizes the City to convey property to another governmental entity without regard to city charter provisions. Although the City Council has adopted an ordinance authorizing the sale, it is not prohibited from also adopting a resolution to authorize staff to SJR -2688350 MU205-30 A-5 finalize the transaction. Finally, an argument can be made that the state law governing land use planning and the disposal of public property preempts the referendum provision in the city charter. • Thus, based upon the above -discussed rationale, it is recommended that any referendum petition received by the City regarding the sale of property from the City to the EDA be denied as insufficient. In addition to the City's involvement in this matter, the city council should also keep in mind that other parties, including Medtronic, may be able to challenge the sufficiency of any referendum petition or potential election based upon the above -referenced case law, statutes and discussion. s LJ SJR -2688350 MU205-30 A-6 RESOLUTION NO, 6650 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2006 SCORE RECYCLING GRANT REQUEST TO RAMSEY COUNTY WHEREAS, Ramsey County is accepting applications for use of SCORE funds to improve recycling participation by the public; and WHEREAS, the City of Mounds View is eligible to apply for a grant to I activities intended to improve recycling provide administrative and promotiona participation among city residents through education, awareness, and incentives; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View has determined that this is an appropriate use of city resources and that increasing recycling participation benefits the public health, safety and welfare of the community as a whole. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City . of Mounds View approve the application for 2006 SCORE funding (attachment) and authorize acceptance of any allocated funding. Adopted this 10th day of October, 2005. Ro arty, Mayor ATTEST:] Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator (seal) a RESOLUTION 6884 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY • STATE OF MINNESOTA CONSIDERING AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 7 OF THE MOUNDS VIEW CITY CHARTER AS PROPOSED BY THE MOUNDS VIEW CHARTER COMMISSION AND DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE LANGUAGE TO BE PLACED ON THE BALLOT FOR A VOTE OF THE QUALIFIED VOTERS AT THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION, PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF MINNESOTA STATUTE 410.12. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Mounds View, pursuant to the recommendation of the City of Mounds View City Charter Commission, has received an amendment to Chapter 7 of the Charter of the City of Mounds View relating to "Taxation and Finances" as proposed by the Mounds View Charter Commission, and WHEREAS, The Mounds View Charter Commission has requested that the City Council prepare a Charter language amendment for a ballot and have it placed before the voters at the next general election, and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute 410.12, Subd. 1 provides that the charter commission may propose amendments to the City Charter, and • WHEREAS, MN Statute 410.12 Subd. 4 provides as follows: Subd. 4. Election. Amendments shall be submitted to the qualified voters at a general or special election and published as in the case of the original charter. The form of the ballot shall be fixed by the governing body. The statement of the question on the ballot shall be sufficient to identify the amendment clearly and to distinguish the question from every other question on the ballot at the same time. If 51 percent of the votes cast on any amendment are in favor of its adoption, copies of the amendment and certificates shall be filed, as in the case of the original charter and the amendment shall take effect in 30 days from the date of the election or at such other time as is fixed in the amendment. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby adopt considering an amendment to Chapter 7 of the Mounds View City Charter as proposed by the Mounds View Charter Commission and directing staff to prepare language to be placed on the ballot for a vote of the qualified voters at the next general election, pursuant to the requirements of Minnesota Statute 410.12. Adopted �Kifi 24th day of JuW, 2006. Rob Marty, Mayor .Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator 0 Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota, was held at the City Hall in said City on August 28, 2006, commencing at 7:00 p.m. The following members were present: Mayor Marty, Councilmember Stigney, Councilmember Flaherty, Councilmember Gunn. and Councilmember Thomas. and the following were absent: None The following resolution was presented by Councilmember Roger Stigney who moved its adoption: RESOLUTION NO. 6921 • RESOLUTION RECEIVING A PROPOSED CHARTER AMENDMENT FROM THE CHARTER COMMISSION BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota (City) as follows: 1. The City Council hereby finds and determines that: a) The Mounds View Charter Commission by Resolution No. 2006-06A has proposed an amendment (Amendment) to Chapter 7 of the City Charter. b) In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 410, the Amendment is to be submitted to the voters of the City at a special election to be held in conjunction with the general municipal election on November 7, 2006. C) The City Council has approved the use of electronic voting machines by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of the members and has complied with the 60 - day notice and six week demonstration requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 206.58, Subdivision 1, and has adopted special rules and instructions for use of the electronic voting machines which have been approved by the 0 Secretary of State. 1 • d) The City Clerk -Administrator has certified to the Secretary of State that an electronic voting system will be used in the City and the date of commencement of the use thereof. 2. The proposition for the adoption of the Amendment will be submitted to the voters of the City at the general election to be held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006. The election will be held and conducted in accordance with the laws of the State of Minnesota relating to municipal elections. 3. The City Clerk -Administrator is directed to cause a notice of election in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A to be posted and published as required by law as follows: (a) The notice of election will be published once in the official newspaper of the City at least two weeks prior to the election; (b) The notice of election and a sample ballot will be posted in the office of the City Clerk -Administrator, and in at least one public place in each ward, if applicable, at least fifteen days prior to the election; and (c) The sample ballot will be published in the official newspaper at least one week prior to the election. • (d) The City Clerk -Administrator has provided or will provide written notice of the election to the County Auditor of Ramsey County at least 53 days before the election, including the date of the election and title and language for the ballot question. 4. The polling places, hours of election and the respective judges for the election will be those established by the City for general elections. The polls will be open from 7:00 a.m. until 8:00 p.m. 5. (a) The City Clerk -Administrator is authorized and directed to prepare the ballot in substantially the following form, subject to the terms of Section 5(b) hereof: CITY QUESTION BALLOT SPECIAL ELECTION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW November 7, 2006. INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS: To vote for a question, fill in the oval next to the word "YES" for • that question. To vote against a question, fill in the oval next to the word "NO" for that question. 295727v6 DJK MU210.4 2 • CITY QUESTION NO. 1: CHARTER AMENDMENT Should Chapter 7 section 7.03 of the City Charter be amended by adding new language to limit annual property taxes, levies and specified fees for City services to a maximum increase of 5%, or the CPI (Consumer Price Index) plus 2%, whichever is less, and to restrict the ability of the City to increase specified fund balances beyond set limits, with any increase in excess of these limits being subject to voter approval? YES NO (b) The City Clerk -Administrator is authorized and directed to prepare separate ballots, ballot strips, or ballot booklets for the elections for use in conjunction with the electronic voting system, on blue paper with black ink pursuant to the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, • Section 206.61. The City Clerk -Administrator will provide each polling place with at least two sample ballots which are facsimiles of the card to be voted on in that precinct, in accordance with Minnesota Statutes Section 206.62. I • 6. The City Council will meet in the City Hall on Monday, November 13, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., C.S.T. to canvass the results of the election and to declare the results thereof. The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Member Sherry Gunn, and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof- and hereof and the following voted against the same: whereupon said resolution was declared duly passed and adopted. 295727v6 DJK MU210-4 3 EXHIBIT A • NOTICE OF SPECIAL ELECTION CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW RAMSEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special election will be held in and for the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota, on Tuesday, the 7th day of November, 2006, at which the following proposition will be submitted to the voters of the City for their approval or rejection: CITY QUESTION NO. 1: CHARTER AMENDMENT Should Chapter 7 section 7.03 of the City Charter be amended by adding new language to limit annual property taxes, levies and specified fees for City services to a maximum increase of 5%, or the CPI (Consumer Price Index) plus 2%, whichever is less, and to restrict the ability of the City to increase specified fund balances beyond set limits, with any increase in excess of these limits being subject to voter approval? YES • NO 71 The polling places for said election are as follows: 5394 Edgewood Drive, Mounds View, Minnesota The polls for said election will be open at 7:00 a.m. and will remain open until closing at 8:00 P.M. Any qualified registered voter of the City is entitled to vote at said election at the polling place of the precinct in which the voter resides, and any resident of the City not previously registered as a voter may register on election day. BY ORDER OF THE CITY COUNCIL Kurt Ulrich, City Clerk -Administrator Dated: August 28, 2006. • 295727v6 DJK MU2104 A- i I . STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF RAMSEY ) SS. CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk -Administrator of the City of Mounds View, Ramsey County, Minnesota, do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on August 28, 2006, with the original thereof on file in my office and the same is a full, true and correct copy thereof, insofar as the same relates to the calling of a special election on the adoption of an Amendment to Chapter 7 of the City Charter. WITNESS My hand as such City Clerk -Administrator and the corporate seal of the City this 7th day of September, 2006. (SEAL) 295727v6 DJK MU210-4 A-2 Kurt Ulrich, City Administrator City Clerk -Administrator City of Mounds View, Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 8681 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION APPROVING A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR A VACANT SEAT ON THE CITY COUNCIL AND APPROVING A SPECIAL ELECTION CALENDAR WHEREAS, the City held an election on November 8, 2016, for Mayor and City Council; m WHEREAS, current Councilmember Carol Mueller ran for Mayor and won the seat in the election; and WHEREAS, this will cause a vacancy for her current City Councilmember seat with a term expiration date of December 31, 2018; and, WHEREAS, in accordance with §4.05, subd. 1 of the City Charter, when a vacancy in an elected office of the City occurs with 365 days or more remaining in the term of the vacated office, there shall be a special election of the unexpired term of the office vacated; and, WHEREAS, the Special Election will occur on Tuesday, March 7, 2017 with polls open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., and all 4 voting precincts will be located in the Banquet Center located at the Mounds View Community Center; and, WHEREAS, Ramsey County Elections will be managing this Special Election in accordance with the 2017-2020 contract; and WHEREAS, the Mounds View City Council approves the attached Special Elections calendar drafted by the Ramsey County Elections office. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View Council orders a Special Election on Tuesday, March 7, 2017, for a vacated City Councilmember seat with a term expiration date of December 31, 2018. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Mounds View City Council authorizes Ramsey County to manage the March 7, 2017, Special Election and approves the attached Special Elections Calendar. Adopted this 12th day of December 2016 Joe Flahert , or ATTEST: James Ericson, City Administrator (seal) Special Election Calendar City of Mounds View Dec 13 Council resolution to call the special election and establish the election calendar Dec 20 Notice of filing published Jan 2 New term of Mayor begins; vacancy occurs Jan 3 Candidate filing period opens Jan 17 Candidate filing period closes at 5:00pm Jan 19 Withdrawal period ends at 5:00pm Jan 20 Final approval of ballot for printer Jan 24 Begin absentee voting for special election Feb 14 Last day to preregister to vote for special election (5:00pm) Feb 24 Public accuracy test of voting equipment Feb 28 Begin in-person absentee voting with ballot counter Mar 4 Extended hours for in-person absentee voting 10:00am — 3:00pm Mar 6 In-person absentee voting ends at 5:00pm Mar 7 Special election — polls open from 7:00am to 8:00pm Mar 13 City canvassing board meeting Mar 20 Contest period expires Mar 27 New council member sworn in RESOLUTION NO. 8790 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION DECLARING THE NECESSITY FOR AN ADDITIONAL TAX LEVY AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROPRIATE BALLOT LANGUAGE WHEREAS, to better address policing needs within the community, the City Council would like to add an additional police officer position to the City's police department; and, WHEREAS, due to spending limitations imposed by the Mounds View City Charter, Section 7.03, Subd. 1, an additional tax levy approved by the voters would be required to fund this position; and, WHEREAS, Section 7.03, Subd. 2 of the City Charter requires that a public hearing be held to consider the purpose, cost and proposed language of the referendum question. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mounds View hereby declares the necessity for an additional tax levy for the specific purpose of adding an additional police officer position to the Mounds View Police Department. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Mounds View does hereby set a public hearing on Monday, July 24, 2017, at 6:00 pm, to be held at Mounds View City Hall, 2401 Mounds View Boulevard, Mounds View, MN 55112, to consider appropriate ballot language. ATTEST: } Y `(SEAQ Adopted this 10th day of July, 2017. Carol A. Mueller, Mayor Desaree M. Crane, Acting City Administrator RESOLUTION NO. 8794 CITY OF MOUNDS VIEW COUNTY OF RAMSEY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING A SPECIAL ELECTION FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX LEVY WHEREAS, to better address policing needs within the community, the City Council would like to add a police officer position to the City's police department; however, due to City Charter imposed levy limits, the City is unable to budget for the additional $85,120 without an additional levy authorization from Mounds View voters; and, WHEREAS, Mounds View City Charter Section 7.03, Subd. 2, provides the authority for the City to levy an additional amount of property taxes beyond the levy limit established in Section 7.03, Subd. 1, via the special election process; and, WHEREAS, an additional levy approved by voters on or before the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November in any levy year may be levied in the same levy year. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mounds View City Council does hereby authorize a special election for November 7, 2017, for consideration of the following question: CITY QUESTION #1: INSTRUCTIONS TO VOTERS: To vote for a question, put an (X) in the square next to the word "YES" for that question. To vote against a question, put an (X) in the square next to the word "NO" for that question. CITY QUESTION #1 PROPERTY TAX LEVY FOR ADDITION OF ONE POLICE OFFICER ❑ YES Shall the Mounds View City Council authorize an additional property tax levy for the purpose of providing funds to add one additional patrol officer to the Mounds View Police Department? ❑ NO BY VOTING "YES" ON THIS BALLOT QUESTION, YOU ARE VOTING FOR A PROPERTY TAX INCREASE. The maximum amount of the increased levy is .012% of the taxable market value of property in the city. The amount of taxes that would be raised in the first year of the increased property tax levy is approximately $85,200.00. Resolution 8794 Page 2 Adopted this 24th day of July, 2017. Carol A. Mueller, Mayor ATTEST: James Ericson, City Administrator (SEAL)