Laserfiche WebLink
State's Attorneys Opinion on the Posture of the Resolution <br /> <br />The following opinion first addresses the ability of this Commission to <br />bind its successors as it relates to a moratorium, and then addresses <br />the procedure of resolutions under HRC Article 3. <br /> <br />Bindinq Successor Commissions <br /> <br />The referenced moratorium resolution contains within its title the words <br />"24-month moratorium". It contains a Motion establishing a moratorium <br />on the destruction or removal of the existing Cass County Jail <br />(presumably the "old" jail) and Sheriffs Residence for a "minimum <br />period of 24 months beginning with passage of this resolution but no <br />later than November 1, 2002". <br /> <br />It is my opinion that the above-referenced statutes governing a county's <br />powers and obligations relating to building and maintaining a jail, <br />together with the powers outlined in the HRC, place this jail issue <br />squarely within the Commission's "governmental and legislative <br />powers", much like a park board's duty to determine if and where to <br />establish a swimming pool and how to manage that pool. The <br />resolution limits the Commission's ability to establish a new holding <br />facility, which is essentially an extension of the jail, because the <br />existing structures are located where the new facility would likely be <br />located, They further limit the Commission by making it essentially <br />unable to effectively plan or act to resolve the matter. The Sheriffs <br />Residence is essentially an adjunct to the jail. In any case, a <br />moratorium clearly relates to the Commission's power and <br />responsibility to determine what to do with county property and fall into <br />the same category of governmental or legislative powers. <br /> <br />This is an election year. Two of the Commission seats are open <br />(current commissioners are not seeking re-election). A new <br />Commission will be seated after the election. The proposed <br />moratorium would have the present Commission inappropriately <br />binding its successors in apparent conflict with the principles set out in <br />the referenced AG's letter. <br /> <br />For this reason alone, it is my opinion that the proposed moratorium <br />coutd not be validly implemented at this time. <br /> <br />Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br /> <br />