2001_0815_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Date: July 27, 2041 To: Members of the Roseville City Charter Commission. ' From: Duke Addicks, Spec�al CounseI, Leagae of Minnesota Cities. I have been asked to review the draft city charter for consistency with state la�vs and court decisions, and to comment on any other �matter of concer�. My review appears beiow. SECTIQN COMMENTS 2.03 The charter cannot lirnit ihe terms of persons elected at the same election �vhere the charter is voted on. M. S. § 414 provides that the charter takes effect 3Q days after the election pr at some other time as is fixed in the charter. Section 12.12 provides an effechve date for the Roseville charter of January 1, 2002. Thus, as drafted, it cannot effect the 2001 election. Even if the proposed charter provided that it would be effective apon enactment, it could not affect the 20Q1 election. The words "concurrently with or" should be deleted from the proposed charter. I understand the idea behind t�is proposal �vas to stagger the terms of council members so that at each city election two counciI members can be elected. In 2003 only one cauncii member will be elected and in 2405 three council no�e�m.bers would be elected. I suggest that the earliest opportuniiy to put these pcovisions into place is for the 2005 election. Thus, § 2.43 shouid also be changed to delete "firsi elecfion" be deleted and after "held" t�e words "in 2005" be inserted. 3.04 The draft has the note in it vvhich reads "Changes to Section 3.04 tabled until discussion of inifiati�ve and referendum". Are there ar�y changes to be proposed ta this sectian? I don't see the necess�ty far any changes. � 4.0� The year is incomplete. It shonld be 2003, since the charter �cvill be on the ballot in 2001. 5.02 Even though the language says that any ordinance, with certain exceptions, may be enacted thro�gh tbe initiative and referendum process, the charter commission should be aware that the Suprerne Court has decided that only ordinances of a legislative nat�re (law) are snbject to initia�ive and referendum. See Oakman v City of EveCetli,163 Minn. 100, 203 N. W. 2d 514 (1925) and Hanson v. City of Gr•anite Falls, 529 N. W. 2d 485 (Minn. App. 1995). Leg�sIative actions are those which are ene�-al in nature and la down a