With that headline the post could go anywhere. But all politics is local. To the town I live in. For now.
Municipalities in Minnesota generally are governed by mayor - council structures, and in the best instances, are supposedly non-partisan with no Tweedle Dee party doing mischief at the expense of the Tweedle Dum party - a two party understood institution that too often, and in a current instance, gets honored in the breach. (At least the town ballot for town council seats does not specify candidate party ties.)
It is firm Minnesota law, within the State that the State IS preeminent, with all powers of its political subunits being by virtue of a grant or delegation of some specific limited powers, by the State.
REPUBLICANS RISING
Ramsey where I live has a governing charter and a city code, that code headlining city jurisdiction, e.g., how the city should be governing itself sanely and wisely over matters indicative by headings of the parts of the city's governing code:
Chapter 6 - ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES
Chapter 10 - ANIMALS
Chapter 14 - EMERGENCY SERVICES
Chapter 18 - ENVIRONMENT
Chapter 22 - FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION
Chapter 26 - LICENSES, PERMITS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS REGULATIONS
Chapter 30 - NUISANCES
Chapter 34 - OFFENSES AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Chapter 38 - PARKS AND RECREATION
Chapter 46 - SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
Chapter 50 - STREETS, SIDEWALKS AND OTHER PUBLIC PLACES
Chapter 54 - TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES
Chapter 58 - UTILITIES
Subpart B - LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
Chapter 105 - BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS
Chapter 106 - ZONING CODE
Chapter 108 - SIGNS
Chapter 109 - MOBILE HOMES AND ...
That's a sampling. You get the idea. Delegated powers to police roads, zoning, liquor licences, parks, fight fires, and police miscreants - that kind of stuff. So, within that context, check the headline, impertinence can arise out of swell-headedness, of a kind that insults town residents by indicating a choice to go beyond limited power to piss on parts of one party's majority-based former juridiction over State law and matters - outside of what the town paychecks are for - to policy and criticism when that party in State control did business. The impertinent insurgency -Things we Republicans have cooked up in an election year as make-believe "issues" while the national Republicans have mired the entire nation in a sick economy, gas pump grief, an unpopular leader, and a war the people are shown by polling to intensely dislike.
The insult to the town's people - elected folks foregoing duties in a way showing they value more a possible future in the legislature than a present duty to wisely run the town in ultra-hard times.
So, what partisanship in concrete detail? Three resolutions online here, here and here, so you can read and judge their actual gravitas to things a town should be doing to run efficiently. In sequence, gin up hate of a new flag; say the Democrat governor back then did his job poorly; and question, can we use that governor as our spiteful toilet?
Who are these clowns? Where and how did they cook up these ideas? Was the Minnesota Open Meeting Law (against secret nonpublic informal majority get-togethers and scheming to pull the wool over opposition eyes) violated by a council majority? Did they sit down with a Mr. Niska, a Republican legislative poohbah, to do the cooking? Then think as if we do a work session (open but no minutes taken) followed by a formal session, we sanitize the stuff? We citizens don't know.
Bigger question: WHY?
What is this whole three resolution bullshit for, other than partisan politics in an election year?
You tell me. It insults. It galls. It cheapens the offices these clowns hold.
_______________UPDATE_____________
The stupidity of this exercise to me is best illustrated by the "Sue Walz" thing. They WHEREAS atop, LDA, not caring that it and other local welfare programs highlighted are discretionary funding, with some rules, and from general funds -- while Feeding Our Future was federally funded with funds earmarked to a particular earmarked purpose. I.e., not affecting LDA whatsoever. It is as if the the evidence is these guys believe "LOGIC doesn't matter because we're on an ill-advised warpath against the Dems."
Moreover, look at the "NOW THEREFORE," where they specify an investigation without specifying a report back. That convinces me these clowns did not have Harry Niska write it up for them. Niska is a competent lawyer, not an amateur, and would have done far better.
The second item, besides not specifying a report back -
2) The City Administrator and City Attorney are directed to investigate the legal means to file
claims against Governor Tim Walz, Attorney General Keith Ellison, and/or the State of
Minnesota separately or in conjunction with other municipalities of the State of Minnesota.
asks the wrong question. Not whether, but howto. The legal means to sue anybody is to have a lawyer and the filing fee -- and ideally to choose the proper venue, file a complant, and follow rules of procedure. The question really is, whether Ramsey has standing based upon the WHEREFOR terms and whether there'd be a snowball's chance to survive pretrial dismissal for failure to state a cause of action on which relief could be granted; i.e., the city attorney's advice would be a legal judgment about whether success in spending into litigation would have an iota's chance to pay off, or be a waste of time. No real damages, means no regular cause of action, but a declaratory judgment could be sought, where that costs, and recovers zippo cash back, i.e., a waste of time and money belonging to the town's taxpaying citizens..
==============================
On the flag thing, there is the official state flag, the official US flag, and other banners. If they want to fly another banner besides the oficial state flag, it could be one saying, FUCK ICE, since that's not obsolete and moot, as is yesterday's flag. And it fits what the overwhelming citizen input of an earlier meeting.
I don't like the new design, but it's not for me to say, the official flag is, at heart, official; other banners are not. And Capitol grounds are by law to fly the official flag. I know of no statute requiring municipalities to do so. And, as petty and dumb as this thing the Republicans on council are doing, the Dems are equally petty and dumb.
Really with the Trump economic burden nationwide on citizens, this is a super distracting non-issue.
Were things up to me, the current flag seems as something some yacht club would fly, as its flag. I see the old flag as racist, the sodbuster in forefront replacing the indigenous figure in the background; the white guy working, the other riding a pony; and the old flag is clearly gender biased, as if only men of either grouping matter.
If wanting to honor Minnesota labor and industry, the flag could have a hammer and sickle except that design's been preempted. My choice would be the old flag with bordered circle having the date statehood was acquired centered within the circle, on a white background.
As one of the states, when statehood happened is of significance and worth emphasis on a state's flag.
============================
What would make sense is if these things were tabled, and these Republican misdirected activists were to consult Repubican Rep. Harry Niska for his guess whether these things would only embarrass the shoddiness and bias the Resolution sponsors show; or whether the mischief would in any way help or hinder his legislative activity, (even as arguably sound PR). That would be under the caveat, don't violate the Open Meeting Law in how you might decide do that. (That law may already have been violated depending upon how this stuff was ginned up to begin with.)
But for now, bottom line, table the crap.
AFTERTHOUGHT: I live here, and have to suffer these things. It's not a matter of international import, but the saying is all politics is local. (Or is "politics" in that sense a plural?)
Also, lawyers give legal advice, I am not a lawyer so these are not legal advice in any way to anyone, but rather my opinions and anyone can have and state opinions.
Also, these folks on council should have the City Attorney consult the League of Minnesota Cities, for advice directly, and whether the League or whichever errors and omission carrier the City uses would be obligated to cover this adventure, should the clownshow push it and get sued for waste and misfeasance.