Ritland: Initiative and referendum is legal in Iowa

Nov. 6—OSKALOOSA — The Mahaska County Board of Supervisors heard an explanation of the City of Oskaloosa's Ordinance 1459, a ballot question that asks voters if Article VI, initiative and referendum, should be removed from the city's charter.

Initiative and referendum is a form of direct democracy that allows city residents to propose, amend or repeal city ordinances by submitting them to voters in an election. Voting "no" to Ordinance 1459 supports maintaining that right in Oskaloosa, while voting "yes" supports removing it from the city's charter.

The city's proposed ordinance was a topic of conversation at the Mahaska County Board of Supervisors' regular meeting Monday morning, when County Attorney Andrew Ritland provided a legal history of initiative and referendum under a home rule charter.

Ritland calls initiative and referendum a "form of direct democracy, in which citizens of a locality can bypass their legislative body and put on the ballot for popular vote [a] measure of public policy."

He says that in Iowa, there has been a years-long discussion about what types of government bodies may practice initiative and referendum.

"This question was really settled back in the '90s in a case called 'Clinton v. Sheridan,'" he says. "In that case, the court recognized that in the 1970s, the legislature gave counties and cities what's called home rule authority, meaning that the counties and cities would maintain a reservoir of power that's not specifically granted by the state government. So before that time, the city and county could do what only the state permitted, and now the city can do anything as long as it doesn't conflict with the state government prohibitions or plans."

In light of the establishment of home rule powers, Ritland says that some cities in Iowa have adopted a home rule charter as their form of government. A home rule charter functions as the constitution of the city. These charters, with some limitations, allow the cities to wield more power than they could have otherwise.

"In 1993, the City of Oskaloosa adopted a Home Rule charter with these expanded powers," Ritland says. "There's not too many cities with a home rule charter. I believe there's five or six other cities in the state, Iowa City being a well-known example. If a city has a home rule charter, they can provide for an initiative and referendum process."

He says that in spite of some previous Attorney General opinions saying that initiative and referendum cannot be legitimately exercised by a city, the Iowa Supreme Court ruled in the "Clinton v. Sheridan" case that it is proper for a city to allow for initiative and referendum.

"The question that I have kind of been asked recently is regarding the question on the ballot, whether it is proper for the City of Oskaloosa to have initiative and referendum at all," Ritland says. "It's my opinion, and I can cite the [Iowa] Supreme Court cases, that it is. You can have that process."

Oskaloosa Mayor David Krutzfeldt was in attendance at the meeting and raised concerns that discussing the ballot question was improper, due to the meeting being held in the Mahaska County Courthouse, which is a voting location.

"I believe there are laws that govern what can and can't be done in a voting place for something that's already on the ballot," he says. "And so I would just ask that you defer to or ask for an opinion from the county attorney regarding whether or not [Ordinance 1459] can be discussed in a voting place."

Ritland informed the board that his office had previously been in contact with the Iowa Secretary of State's office regarding the issue, and that they had been advised that as long as the discussion was held on the third floor of the courthouse, rather than the first, there were no legal issues that would affect the discussion.

Krutzfeldt spoke again during the closing public comment session, saying he wanted to offer a little background regarding the city's motivation with Ordinance 1459, which came directly after Oskaloosa resident Alicia Helm attempted to exercise initiative and referendum by submitting an ordinance to city council that would have barred the city from constructing the proposed South Central Regional Airport without first submitting the issue to a vote in a city election.

Helm's proposed ordinance would also require the city to withdraw from the South Central Regional Airport Agency, or SCRAA, and sell any property it owns related to SCRAA.

In an unrelated matter, her ordinance would also call for A Avenue/Highway 92 and Market Street/Highway 63 to be converted back to four lanes.

Helm also submitted a proposed charter amendment that would repeal several limitations that Article VI of the city's charter currently applies to the use of initiative and referendum in Oskaloosa. Krutzfeldt says that the repeal of these limitations is particularly what caught the city's attention, and that to avoid confusion and keep things simple, the city decided to simply "revert back to [the] state," and instead of writing their own ordinance, use the language of "in accordance with state code."

The repeals would include but are not limited to restrictions pertaining to measures of an executive or administrative nature, the city's budget, or any measures that would interfere with the city's contractual relations in the past, present or future.

Channing Rucks can be reached at crucks@oskyherald.com.