Agenda - Council - 06/09/1998 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. William Goodrich June 3, 1998 Page 7 The MLPA provides that city cot~ncil adoption of a comprehensive plan amendment is to be by resolution. Minn. Stats., section 462.355, sub& 3. It must be assumed that the legislature chose to specify adoption by resolution rather than ordinance for a reason. In most cities, the procedures for adopting a resolution are not the same as the procedures for adopting an ordinance. For example, charters may provide that adoption of an ordinance requires introduction of the ordinance in writing, several readings and a delayed effective date after adoption. No such requirements exist" in the case of resolutions. An ordinance must be published; a resolution generally need not be. A resolution may be immediately effective; ordinances are not. An ordinance requires a majority vote of the council; a resolution requires only the vote of a majority of a quorum. The distinction between resolution and ordinance is not merely a matter of form. In cities having charters calling for referendum on ordinances, action by ordinance could subject the matter to a referendum; action by resolution would not be subject to referendum. It seems very likely that the legislature specified action by resolution to ensure that the council's decision could not be overturned by referendum in cities with charters providing for referendum. Because section 410.20 authorizes elections only for ordinances and because the MLPA specifies that plan amendments are to be approved by resolution, charter section 14.1.3 exceeds the authority of the city to require voter approval of council action. It could be argued that the action of the city council in approving a comprehensive plan amendment is legislative in character and therefore the proper subject for a referendum. However, even if this were legally correct and the approval of a comprehensive plan amendment were considered to be in the nature of an ordinance, the procedure for voter approval in charter section 14.1.3 is inconsistent with the procedures authorized by Minn. Stats., section 410.20. Section 410.20 allows for two possible types of referendum procedures. Under the first type, the city council adopts an ordinance which becomes and remains effective until a petition is received by the city and an election results in repealing the ordinance. Under the second type of referendum procedure which the statute allows, the city council adopts an ordinance. The ordinance, however, does not become effective until a specified period of time has elapsed. If within that period of time, the council receives a petition, the ordinance does not become effective until approved by the voters. If, however, a petition is not received during that period of time, the ordinance becomes effective automatically. RAI2?,-.r,i