Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Tenant Rights topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Council declines to send tenant "right to repair" measure to 2026 ballot after legal concerns

City of Saint Paul City Council · August 5, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After receiving a city‑attorney memo that flagged conflicts with state law and the Constitution, the Saint Paul City Council voted 2–5 to reject placing a tenant right‑to‑repair ordinance on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot.

The Saint Paul City Council voted against placing a tenant right‑to‑repair measure on the Nov. 3, 2026 municipal ballot after the city attorney's office told council members that the draft ordinance conflicted with state law and the Constitution.

City Attorney Staley told the council that “our office did recently send out a memorandum of the council members that come to conclusion that the, ordinance conflicted with some state law and constitution.” Vice President Yeh moved to approve the resolution and urged the council to leave the decision to voters, saying, “I really urge you to leave it to our voters. I hold our Saint Paul voters capable of being able to cast a vote, letting us know where they stand on this initiative.”

Council Member Johnson said she would oppose putting the current text before voters, citing legal vulnerabilities and enforceability concerns: “The right to repair ordinance was deemed unlawful. And it actually was seen as a conflict of state law.” After discussion the council took a roll call vote: two in favor, five opposed. The resolution failed and the council did not instruct the clerk to place the question on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot.

The debate focused on whether the petition language — submitted by organizers — could survive legal challenge and on whether voters would receive clear, enforceable provisions. The council did not develop substitute language during the meeting; no alternate ballot text was approved. The item was recorded in the minutes as resolution item 30 and the city attorney's memorandum was referenced repeatedly during council remarks.