Laserfiche WebLink
William K. Goodrich <br />Page 4 <br /> <br /> The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that the right of <br />referendum is generally limited to "acts of legislation" by a <br />governmental authority, and does not apply to "administrative" <br />actions. Oakman v. City of Eveleth, 163 Minn. 100, 105-09, 203 <br />N'.W. 514, 516-18 (1925). An ordinance is legislative rather than <br />administrative if it enacts a permanent new law, general in <br />nature and uniform in application. Id. at 106, 203 N.W. at 516. <br />A proposed ordinance is administrative, however, if it <br />administers an existing law, and requires investigation and the <br />exercise of discretion and judgment. Id. SeQ. also Anderson v. <br />City of Two Harbors, 244 Minn. 496, 501-03, 70 N.W.2d 414, 418-19 <br />(1955); Op. Atty. Gen. 59a-32 (October 7, 1968). The Minnesota <br />Supreme Court has consistently ruled that the adoption of a <br />zoning ordinance or other zoning policy by a city is a <br />legislative matter subject to referendum. Oakman, 163 Minn. at <br />106, 203 N.W. at 516; Denney v. City of Duluth, 295 Minn. 22, <br />28, 202 N.W.2d 892, 895 (1972). See also Ops. Atty. Gen. 59a-32 <br />(October 7, 1968), 858 (July 21, 1967). More recently, the <br />Supreme Court has held that the amendment of a comprehensive <br />zoning ordinance by a city is also a legislative action which may <br /> <br /> <br />