Laserfiche WebLink
-! 3 <br /> *Applying the above factors, I do not believe a public purpose exists for aiding city residents <br /> who have suffered property damage resulting from a storm. Such an expenditure would not <br /> benefit the community as a whole; it is not directly related to the functions of government; <br /> and it would primarily benefit a private interest. <br /> Moreover, a statutory city has only those powers that are clearly granted to it by the <br /> legislature. Therefore, a city may exercise only those powers expressly granted to it except <br /> those powers which are necessarily implied or incident to the powers expressly granted and <br /> those powers which are indispensable to the declared objectives and purposes of the city. <br /> In the present case, there does not appear to be any statute that specifically authorizes a city <br /> to give money to citizens who have suffered property damage resulting from a storm. Nor <br /> can such a purpose be implied from other city powers. <br /> During the past legislative session, there was special legislation passed authorizing cities to <br /> provide assistance to other cities in a disaster area due to the 1997 spring floods.' This law, <br /> _however, is applicable to the present case. The law does not provide for direct assistance <br /> to individuals, and from my understanding of the facts, the damage did not occur as a result <br /> of the spring floods. <br /> • In conclusion, there is no specific statutory authority for making the requested expenditure <br /> and there does not appear to be any public purpose justify the expenditure. <br /> I hope that you find the above information useful. Since this matter involves a legal <br /> conclusion, 'I am forwarding a copy of this letter to your city attorney pursuant to League <br /> policy. <br /> If X can provide.you with any further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. <br /> Very truly yours, <br /> D. Christopher Smith <br /> Staff Attorney <br /> c: William R. Soth (via fax) <br /> ' See, e.g., Minnetonka Flec. Co. v. Village of Golden Valley, 273 Minn. 301, <br /> 304, 141 N.W.2d 138, 140 (1966). <br /> 0 S 1997 Minn. Laws. ch. 75. <br /> -2- <br /> TOTAL P.02 <br />