Agenda - Council - 09/23/1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

IMPACT OF CHARTER AMENDMENT By: Ryan R. Schroeder, City Administrator CASE Background: As Council is aware, the City received a petitioned for amendment to the City Charter on June 24, 1997. This petition was certified on July 8,1997. The election was scheduled on August 8, 1997, and will be held on September 22, 1997. As Council has discussed, there are many troubling aspects to the language of this particular petition. Among other things, if passed, this Charter language has an effective date of January 1, 1997, almost nine months prior to the actual election. Further, during this nine-month period, several activities have occurred which may be impacted by retroactivity of this proposed legislation. An example of the concern relative to retroactivity is Alpine Estates. The primary action items relative to this development are as follows: October 8, 1996 ......... Council authorized disposition of the property December 6, 1996 ........ The City received bids for the property December 10, 1996 ....... Council authorized sale to KC Land Company January 14, 1997 ......... Purchase agreement approved, disposition ordinance adopted April 8, 1997 ........... Preliminary Plat approved May 27, 1997 ........... Final Plat/development agreement approved - rezoning introduced June 10, 1997 ........... Rezoning adopted June 24, 1997 ........... Charter petition received with 1/1/97 effective date September 12, 1997 ....... Property closing held September 22, 1997 ....... Charter election The obvious concern is that a development process was completed prior to an election which, if passed, negates this development process which will have a financial impact upon the parties to the process. I have enclosed correspondence between Harstad Companies (the purchaser/developer in this example) and the City Attorney regarding this issue. Basically, Harstad has put the City on notice of their position that implementation of this Charter upon their property will result in a damage claim. It is expected that a similar position will be taken by parties interested in the Apple Ridge/Barthold development and perhaps other effected property owners. I have also included a transmittal from the Metropolitan Council. While they may or may not have concerns similar to that stated above, they do have concerns relative to the delegation of zoning authority by the City represented by this, and. perhaps previous Charter amendments. The Metropolitan Council Board Community Development Committee approved the enclosed Council staff report which directs that the Regional