Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Sieber stated that two years ago there was an airport study <br />prepared and hearings held. There was a lot of citizens against the project <br />and they petitioned accordingly. Councilmember Cox stood up at the hearing <br />and informed the people that no matter how much they protest, Council can <br />do what they want if they have a 4/5 vote. Commissioner Sieber stated, based <br />on previous comments of Councilmember Cox, he will never vote for something <br />that says Council can override the wishes of the citizens by a 4/5 vote. <br /> <br />Mr. Dorn stated that in his personal opinion if you tie the hands of city <br />government, you are tying your own hands. He stated that he has some <br />concerns regarding the charter that has been drafted and isn't sure that <br />it is legally sound. Mr. Dorn stated that the charter draft should be <br />submitted to the Attorney General's office for legal opinion. Specifically, <br />the special assessments section is in trouble, there are areas involved <br />that have never been tested legally. <br /> <br />Amendment - Section 8.04.01 - First SentenCe - Add the following phrase <br />after the words 'estimated cost': 'to be paid by the City'. <br /> <br />Mr. Dorn stated that this Commission has to temper the degree to which you <br />take steps to prevent a 4/5 vote by Council deciding your destiny. Mr. <br />Dorn stated that his job is to let this Commission know how far it can go <br />legally and this is not a subject matter that has a great deal of interpretation. <br />The trouble with reading one section of a State statute (Chapter 429) is <br />that there are thousands of other phrases throughout that could apply. <br />If the Supreme Court sees a situation in which a small percentage of the <br />electorate can effectively thwart the will of the public body which has <br />been elected by a majority of the electorate, the court will throw the <br />charter out. If you obtain an opinion from the Attorney General on this <br />chapter of your proposed charter and that opinion is favorable, then you <br />have what you want. If the opinion is not favorable, it is considered <br />binding and you cannot submit that charter to the public. If this Commission <br />does not submit your proposed charter to the Attorney General for review, <br />you will be acting against my advice and that is your perrogative and I <br />have the right to make my legal opinion of the charter known. I don't feel <br />a charter can take precedence over Chapter 429. I would be more comfortable <br />if you adopte special assessments by ordinance. The problems with writing <br />a charter will come up when you try to think of every situation that is <br />going to occur in this town and that is impossible. <br /> <br />Commissioner Sieber inquired as to how a charter could allow for a last- <br />ditch effort to stop Council from doing something. <br /> <br />Mr. Dorn stated that he would prefer to see assessments done by ordinance <br />and the entire electorate of the city voting on the issue. What this <br />proposed charter has done is attempted to create a ne~hb6rhood referendum <br />situation -- if you can define neighborhoods to the Courts, that would be <br />O.K. Chapter 8 needs a lot of work and if you have followed the Mounds <br />View charter, I would like to meet with their City Attorney. <br /> <br />Chairman Heitman stated that what this Commission would like from Mr. Dorn is <br />suggestions as to what he feels would satisfy the Commission's intent and <br />the law. <br /> <br />Mr. Dorn suggested presenting the charter draft to the citizens at the <br />public hearing, but to specify that it is subject to legal opinion. If <br />the citizenry are in favor of the charters direction then it can be submitted <br />for legal opinion. <br /> Sp CC/Sept~ber 26, 1983 Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br /> <br />