02-24-2025 CC Agenda Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

27-CV-25-2808 Filed in District Court State of Minnesota 2/15/2025 12:08 PM occup[ies] a particular field of legislation."' (quoting City of Morris v. Sax Inns., Inc., 749 N.W.2d 1, 6 (Minn. 2008)). "A conflict exists between state law and a municipal regulation when the law and the regulation `contain express or implied terms that are irreconcilable with each other,' when `the ordinance permits what the statute forbids,' or when `the ordinance forbids what the statute expressly permits."' (quoting Mangold Midwest Co. v. Richfield, 143 N.W.2d 813, 816 (Minn. 1966))). 97.And, perhaps more to the point, Minnesota law simply does not grant a city power to pass a retroactive special -election ordinance. It can pass a future -looking ordinance, to be sure. But that ordinance cannot apply retroactively because state law does not explicitly provide for it. See Minn. Stat. § 645.21 ("No law shall be construed to be retroactive unless clearly and manifestly so intended by the legislature."); Duluth Firemen's Relief Assn v. Duluth, 361 N.W.2d 381, 385 (Minn. 1985) ("Section 645.21 requires that there be much clearer evidence of retroactive intent in the statute's language -- such as mention of the word `retroactive' -- before we determine that a statute was intended to be applied retroactively."); see also Dickey Aff. Ex. Q (Op. Atty. Gen. 471-M, Aug. 22, 1963) ("the rule is that statutes will not be construed to shorten the terms of incumbent officers unless the intent is plainly and clearly expressed." (quoting State ex rel. Stutsman v. Light, 281 N.W. 777, 779 (N.D. 1938))); 3 McQuillin Mun. Corp. § 12:164 (3d ed.) ("Unless otherwise provided by law, one holds until the office is filled as the law prescribes."). 98. Under these principles, to appoint a person to a city council position subject to a special election at a time other than "the regular city election," Minn. Stat. § 412.02, 22 77