Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. William Goodrich <br />October 13, 1997 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br /> This is not inconsistent with the holding in A.C.E. Equipment Company v. Erickson, 152 <br />N.W. 2d 739 (Minn. 1967) where it was decided that a provision of Minnesota Statutes, section <br />462.18 (1961) was not intended to override the procedural requirements of the city of <br />Minneapolis in enacting zoning ordinances. The statute authorized, for cities of the first class, <br />the adoption of regulations "only after the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the <br />governing body .... "The city building inspector refused to issue a building permit after the mayor <br />vetoed the amendment to the zoning ordinance. The plaintiffs insisted that the statutory <br />procedure controlled and that the mayor had no power to veto the ordinance. <br /> <br />The Court stated that: <br /> <br />"We cannot accept plaintiffs view since § 462.18 grants to municipalities through their <br />governing bodies the power to regulate zoning by local ordinance. This constitutes an <br />explicit grant of power. Said statute does not dictate the method the local body should <br />utilize while exercising that power .... The Minneapolis City Charter is such specific <br />legislation [which states how Minneapolis must operate to pass an ordinance] and as such <br />its provisions control in the instant case." P. 741. <br /> <br /> Significantly, in your case the state statute does dictate the method that applies to <br />subdivision control and specifically prohibits interference by changing development density, lot <br />size and lot layout during the periods prescribed by statute. The plat data information is crucial. <br />Under the conclusions of this letter, the city of Ramsey cannot modify density requirements by <br />applying the charter amendments inconsistently with Minn. Stats. § 462.358, subd. 3c. <br /> <br /> Although this letter responds only to the narrow question relating to the five subdivisions <br />identified in the plat status chart, you should be aware, as I have indicated in my earlier <br />correspondence, that other issues of preemption and conflict may at some point require a <br /> <br />response. <br /> <br />FBO:ds <br /> <br />loyd/B. Olson <br /> <br />FBO131640 <br />RA125-.51 <br /> <br /> <br />