My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-09-26-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2026
>
02-09-26-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/17/2026 11:22:22 AM
Creation date
2/17/2026 11:17:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
144
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
b. Court review of quasi-judicial decisions <br />Northwestern college v. city of <br />In quasi-judicial situations, a reviewing court will more closely scrutinize the <br />Arden Hills, 281 N.W.2d 865 <br />(Minn. 1979). <br />city's decision to determine whether they city has provided a legally and <br />factually sufficient basis for its decision in an adequate record. This is <br />especially true in the area of land use regulation such as zoning and <br />subdivision. <br />In quasi-judicial situations, due process and equal protection are the main <br />reasons for the more stringent scrutiny. Due process and equal protection <br />under the law demand that similar applicants must be treated uniformly by the <br />city. A reviewing court will overrule a quasi-judicial city decision if it <br />determines that the decision was arbitrary (failed to treat equally situated <br />applicants equally or failed to follow ordinance requirements). <br />C. Role of records in building the city's case <br />Swanson v. city of. <br />The public record is being increasingly reviewed by the courts to determine <br />Bloomington„ 421 N.W.2d 307 <br />(Minn. 1988). <br />whether the city's action involved a reasonable means to a legal end. The law <br />provides that cities have considerable discretion in developing plans, setting <br />standards, and deciding applications. The public record, as a whole, must <br />demonstrate that the city acted reasonably in enforcing its plans, standards, <br />and regulations. It does not matter that the city acted reasonably if it is unable <br />to prove its actions through the public record. <br />In reviewing the public record, courts look primarily to a city council's findings <br />of fact. A city council must apply the facts to the law and find reasons upon <br />which to base its decision. The reasons or rationale are referred to as findings <br />of fact and need to be an adequate factual basis in the public record to support <br />the council's decision. Inadequate findings may result in a reversal of the <br />council's decision. <br />B. Mayor's role in building an adequate <br />record <br />As the presiding officer at city meetings, the mayor can be essential to <br />ensuring that an adequate record protects the city's decisions from being <br />overruled by a court. Key ways to build a complete record include: <br />• Following rules of procedure that require formal motions for all council <br />actions. <br />• Restating motions clearly for the minute taker prior to opening debate and <br />voting. <br />• Announcing the vote clearly on city motions. <br />Minnesota <br />Mayors Chapter 1-25 <br />Association <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.