Laserfiche WebLink
important than a resolution or ordinance. It seems backwards to require a greater number of <br />people than to amend the Charter. There is some wording in the Charter that requires 10% of the <br />registered voter versus State law, which says 5% of who voted in the last election. The other part <br />of it is that based on a single legal opinion that was obtained by a City Council that was pro- <br />development was used to base the decision to ignore the Charter amendment. It seems every <br />lawyer hired by someone has their own find. That is dangerous because when you have an <br />amendment to the Charter, it deals with an issue that's there simply because its felt City Council <br />is not doing their job. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that if he is not doing his job, he wants <br />citizens to be able to recall him or whoever is not doing their job. We need to initiate what the <br />City Council refuses to initiate. <br /> <br />Chairperson Kiefer stated that Councilmember Hendriksen is speaking of the ruling on February <br />13 - the opinion that Chapter 14.2 was inappropriate for the Charter - that it took away the <br />responsibility of the City Council for zoning. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that he read that opinion and other opinions of other states <br />with regard to the Municipal Planning Act. State law occupies the field for planning - no other <br />mechanics affect it; no other case in Minnesota but the Denny versus Duluth and there has been <br />no ruling made. Kennedy & GraVen looked at cases from other states. Other state's opinions do <br />not correlate to this case or to Minnesota State law. <br /> <br />Commissioner Henke stated that Chapter 14 passed in 1995 and 1997 by the voters - is that <br />being challenged? <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated no, that City Council sought the opinion from Kennedy & <br />Graven and they kept that opinion private and just released it last Tuesday night. <br /> <br />Commissioner Henke asked why it took three years to implement it. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that even some on City Council are saying this is <br />unconstitutional. The only claim that's being made is that the Charter amendment is not <br />enforceable as a zoning regulation. Nowhere has he heard that it cannot be a part of the Charter. <br />There is no way to petition for a change via a form like there would be a form for rezoning, etc.; <br />the first issue has not been determined in a court of law. The second issue has not even been <br />addressed. <br /> <br />Commissioner Henke felt that it is not right that Citizens voted on it and it has never been <br />implemented. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen stated that is why there will be another petition coming in, probably <br />tomorrow. Th~ City will be' seeing a petition, which we believe, has sufficient signatures_to.. <br />require a vote on that particular ordinance. <br /> <br />It was the Charter consensus at that time that it was inappropriate - it was more appropriate for <br />an ordinance. <br /> <br />Charter Commission - February 15, 2001 <br /> Page 3 of 12 <br /> <br /> <br />