Laserfiche WebLink
William K. Goodrich <br />Page 7 <br /> <br /> the reenactment was not done to defeat the city's referendum <br /> provisions. Id. at 57, 155 N.W.2d at 285-86. The Court stated <br /> that the test from ~agnella is essentially whether the city has <br /> acted in good faith in repealing a prior ordinance and enacting a <br /> new ordinance. Id. at 57, 155 N.W.2d a= 285. <br /> <br /> In the case of the Ramsey Airport Zoning Ordinance, <br />therefore, it would not be appropriate for the Ramsey City <br />Council to reenact an ordinance similar to Ordinance 87-7 unless <br />the Council. acts in good faith to pass an "essentially different" <br />ordinance than the previously rejected ordinance. ~eqne~la, 133 <br />Minn. at 100, 155 N.W. at 992. It would be clearly <br />inappropriate, however, for tl~e City Council to enact the same or <br />similar ordinance with the intent of defeating or bypassing the <br />referendum provisions of Section 5 of the Ramsey City Charter. <br /> <br /> QUESTION TWO <br /> <br /> Notwithstanding the City Charter <br /> authorized referendum denying the adoption of <br /> Ordinance 87-7, may the Commissioner of <br /> Transportation of the State of Minnesota under <br /> the authority of Minn. Stat. § 360.063, <br /> subd. 6 (1988) adopt, upon the request of the <br /> Ramsey City Council, zoning regulations to <br /> prevent the creation or establishment of <br /> airport hazards which could affect the Gateway <br /> North Industrial Airport? <br /> <br /> OPINION <br /> <br /> In our opinion, this question should be answered in =he <br /> <br />affirmative. There is ~' ~ . in . <br /> no~n_nu Minn. Stat § 360.063, subd. 6 <br /> <br /> <br />