When the holidays come around, I tend to get a little sentimental; look back over the year and think about forgiveness and changes for the new year. In a moment of this this past weekend, I was honestly thinking, "Maybe I've been too hard on Phyllis this last year. Maybe I can invite her to lunch, sit down and we can talk about this and try and see each other's points, and maybe even figure out something that both of us would think was fair...." And then I read something like this:
http://www.swjournal.com/display/inn_news/news04.txt and it sets me back on the right path. In a seemingly unprecendented display of dizzying logic that would have forced MC Escher, to get up and excuse himself from the room until things settled down a bit, Kahn & Co have launched their latest offensive against the City of Minneapolis voters and officials, this time threatening the Elected's salaries if don't submit. This latest attempt at coercing the Council and Mayor to force early elections has as its basis Minnesota Statutes 205.84, subdivision 2, which in summation says that if the City fails to confirm the existing ward or the new ones in the proper time, they shall not be paid. Leaving aside for a minute that there's a lawsuit on the table that prevents a full confirmation until it is settled, that the City voted on the adoption of the map, and that Kahn's intrepretation of what the statute means is skewed; I find it fascinating that the legal team either or omitted or neglected to notice the subdivision right above, Subdivision 1: "Subdivision 1. General provisions. In a city electing council members by wards, wards shall be as equal in population as practicable and each ward shall be composed of compact, contiguous territory. Each council member shall be a resident of the ward for which elected, but a change in ward boundaries does not disqualify a council member from serving for the remainder of a term." And there it is, in black and white. In the very statutes that our House members are the custodians of, it refutes Phyllis' claim on the need for or the unlawfulness of not holding early actions. In fact, it would seem that an attempt to force them is, in actuality, an attempt to circumvent the very laws that Phyllis is one of the guardians of...talk about things that make you go "hmmmmn." We've had the conversation about whether intentions matter or not, but if you're not going to question Kahn & Co.'s reasons for doing this, one needs to question the logic in doing it at all. Jonathan Palmer Victory Article follows: Wrath of Kahn: gunning for politicians' salaries to force early elections By Scott Russell Minneapolis DFL State Rep. Phyllis Kahn has found the ultimate in political payback: she says if Mayor R.T. Rybak and City Councilmembers don't hold city elections ahead of schedule in November 2005, they must repay a year and a half of their salaries. It's the latest -- and most personal -- twist in an elections lawsuit against the city of Minneapolis. Kahn and a group including Southwest residents Mark Kaplan and Ann Berget say current wards, based on the 1990 Census, have grown so unequal in population that they subvert the Constitution's one-person, one-vote principle. City leaders counter that the legislative prohibitions kept them from reapportioning for the 2001 elections, and four-year terms granted that year shouldn't be shortened. During a recent court hearing, Kahn said her legal team pulled out Minnesota Statutes 205.84, subdivision 2. The law says if the city's governing body fails to confirm old ward boundaries or adopt new ones in the time required, "no further compensation shall be paid to the mayor or Councilmember...." If the argument prevails in court, it will take a mighty bite out of Councilmembers' wallets. Based on 18 months since the May 2002 reapportionment deadline, Rybak would have to pony up about $130,000; each Councilmember about $100,000. All told, city leaders would fork over $1.4 million -- far more than the $400,000 city election officials have said an extra, early election would cost. "It is a wonderful statute; it is just incredible," Kahn said. "It says if the city doesn't adopt the redistricting plan, that they have to serve without pay." Kent Kaiser, communications director for the Minnesota Secretary of State's office, said the issue hinges on whether the court says the city's vote to adopt the new map -- which the Minneapolis City Council took within 60 days after legislative redistricting -- meets the legal requirement, or whether it actually has to hold an election and implement the new wards. Said Kahn: "We are saying 'adopt' means 'adopt and implement.' " James Moore, the assistant city attorney handling the case, said he could not comment on pending litigation. REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
