PELICAN GROUP OF LAKES
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT

P.O. Box 336, Pelican Rapids, MN 56572-0336
October 2, 2004

 

 

 

Hon. Mike Hatch
Attorney General
State of Minnesota
1400 NCL Tower
445 Minnesota St.
St. Paul, MN 55101

RE: Request for Formal Legal Opinions

Dear Attorney General Hatch:

This request is made on behalf of the Pelican Group of Lakes Improvement District(“PGOLID”), a political subdivision created pursuant to MSA § 103B.501. PGOLID’s governing Board approved submission of this request
at its October 2, 2004 regular meeting.

The questions concern who is eligible to vote at the statutory annual meeting of the lakeimprovement district (“LID”). Section 103B.571 requires that the LID conduct an annual meeting which includes the following agenda:
   
   (a) At the annual meeting the district property owners present shall:

   (1) elect one or more directors to fill any midterm vacancies in the board         of directors;

   (2) approve a budget for the fiscal year;

   (3) approve or disapprove proposed projects by the district having a         cost to the district in excess of $5,000; and

   (4) take up and consider other business that comes before them.

   (b) At the annual meeting all district property owners, including absent         members as provided in the order establishing the district, shall
        elect one or more directors for board positions with expiring terms.

In turn, section 103B.505(6) defines "Property owner" as “the owner of
real property within the district or the buyer under contract for deed
of property in the district.“

 

Attorney General Hatch
October 5, 2004
Page 2 of 3


However, the Legislature does not appear to have provided answers to many other questions that we have encountered while conducting our annual meetings.1

The core question that has arisen is:

   Question 1: Can a LID establish voting procedures that give one vote
   to each parcel of land in the district rather than one vote per named    owner or owners of the parcel?

If the answer to question 1 is negative, what are the answers to the following questions?

    Question 2: Does the term “property owner” include all natural persons     who are listed on the deed or contract for deed, even if they are less     than the age of majority?

    Question 3: Is there any limit to the number of natural persons who
    can be listed on a deed or contract for deed who are considered a    “property owner” and are therefore entitled to notice of, and vote at,     annual meetings?

    Question 4: Does a “property owner” get more than one vote if he,
    she, they or it own more than one separately identified parcel of real     property within PGOLID?

    Question 5: Does the answer to the question immediately above
    change if any of the properties have some owners who are the same,     but also have different owners? For example, parents A and B own     parcel 1 together with their children C and D. An adjacent parcel 2     within PGOLID is owned by A, B and C, while adjacent parcel 3 within     PGOLID is owned by A, B and D.

    Question 6: How many “property owners” are entitled to vote if a
    parcel within PGOLID is owned by a natural person and a legal entity     such as a trust?

   
Question 7: Who is the “property owner” when real property within
    PGOLID is held by a trust? Is it the trustee(s) or the beneficiary or     beneficiaries, or all or some of them?

    Question 8: Does a trust, partnership or corporation “property owner”     get more than one vote if the respective entity has multiple trustees
    (or beneficiaries),multiple partners or multiple shareholders? If so,
    how many votes and is there a maximum?

______________

1 We are aware your office previously provided an informal letter on this issue, a copy of which is attached for reference. We note further that the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has promulgated regulations which contain definitions of “owner” and “ resident owner” for purposes of petitioning to establish a Lake Improvement District. See Minnesota Rules 6115.0900 et seq. If you determine those Rules impact this issue,
please include them in your consideration of the questions.

 

Attorney General Hatch
October 5, 2004
Page 3 of 3



    Question 9: If a natural person has lost his or her right to vote in
    state elections through judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction,     does that person lose their “property owner” voting rights?

None of these questions are hypothetical. All of them have been encountered by PGOLID in either providing notice of the annual meeting
or in absentee or in-person voting at the annual meeting. We will therefore appreciate your guidance on these issues, the resolution of which are crucial to the operation of PGOLID.

Please let me know if your office needs additional information about PGOLID or the background or reasons for these questions. Thank you in advance for your legal opinions.

Sincerely,
The Pelican Lake Group of Lakes Improvement District
__________________________________________
By Daniel J. Crothers,
It’s Board Chair
cc: David Hauser, Otter Tail County Attorney