This article got to be much longer than originally planned. It starts with a letter to the editor from an elected official that raised questions for me on specific rules for city councils and whether each city council was beholden to the same rules. The librarian in me just had to share what I learned and the resources I used – starting with the Minnesota Legislative Reference Library.
A letter to the editor from a City Council member
The Minneapolis Times published a letter from Minneapolis City Council member, on his prescribed role dealing with a recently proposed data center. I didn’t know the rules for various votes. His need to speak up, also tells a story about the passion constituents are feeling about data centers…
My office has received a lot of correspondence pertaining to the proposed data center on the Star Tribune site and the community has repeatedly asked (and in some cases demanded) me to come out against this project. I want to take a moment to explain the difference between the city council’s votes on legislative policy versus a land use item such as the Star Tribune data center application which is considered a quasi-judicial vote.
A proposed policy item, like the proposed citywide data center ordinance, is legislative in nature and I am free to express my policy views, however, pending land use applications are like a court proceeding and are classified as quasi-judicial. Our City Attorney reminds us that in quasi-judicial matters we must avoid any prejudgment and if we express our position prior to the council voting on the item, we will be disqualified from voting on it and will be forced to recuse ourselves from that vote.
What is the difference between legislative authority and quasi-judicial authority?
I read this and I realized, I don’t know enough about the different kinds of votes. The League of Minnesota Cities Planning and Zoning 101 was a good refresher (or primer). Here’s specifically what it says about legislative authority and quasi-judicial authority…
Legislative authority
When creating, adopting, and amending land use plans and zoning ordinances, a city is making law by exercising so-called “legislative” authority. The council sits as a body of elected representatives to make plans and laws (ordinances) for the entire community to advance health, safety, and welfare.
When acting legislatively, a city council can engage in far-ranging policy discussion, and sort through competing views about what plans and laws would be in the best interest of the city. Although not everyone may be on board with the outcome, the more public participation in the law-making stage, the better the understanding among the public of why the city has a particular plan or law in place.
The council has broad discretion when acting legislatively, and any reviewing court will give the city considerable deference.
Pyramid of discretion
Quasi-judicial authority
In contrast, when applying existing plans and laws, a city council exercises so-called “quasi-judicial” authority. The limited task is to determine the facts associated with a particular request, and then apply those facts to the relevant law. A city council has less discretion when acting quasi-judicially, and a reviewing court will examine whether the city council applied rules already in place to the facts before it.
It can be helpful to visualize this as a “pyramid of discretion,” showing cities have greater discretion when making land use decisions at the base of the triangle, and less as decision-making moves up the pyramid. Discretion is greatest when officials are creating local laws and the least when officials are administering those laws.
Land use disputes arise most often when a city is applying laws, rather than when making law. But a city usually has less ability to address the root of the dispute when applying the law, than it would when making the law in the first instance.
Must all city council abide by the same rules?
Once again, the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) has helpful information in the Handbook for Minnesota Cities: Chapter 13: Comprehensive Planning, Land Use and City-Owned Land. The quick answer is that it’s different outside the seven-county metro area…
Cities are granted the authority to regulate land use by the Municipal Planning Act. Cities outside the seven-county metro area are not required to regulate land use. For those cities engaged in land use regulation, the Municipal Planning Act provides the framework that all cities must follow. Cities regulate land use through three basic tools:
• The comprehensive plan.
• The zoning ordinance.
• The subdivision ordinance.
I won’t dive into the nitty gritty, but I will say LMC recommends having the comprehensive plan to guide decisions. They outline best practices for the creation and process. And then they do the same for zoning and subdivision ordinances. The detail they provide makes is difficult to summarize but would also make it helpful to apply to a situation on the frontlines.
