Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 08Item #8 r�J; Lakeville Memorandum To: Mayor and City Council From: Steven C. Mielke, City Administrator Allyn G. Kuennen, Administrative Services Manger . Date: January 23, 2014 Subject: City of Lakeville 2014 Legislative Priorities City of Lakeville Administration As the 2014 Minnesota State Legislature gets underway on February 25th, there will be many legislative initiatives and bills considered. The adoption of legislative priorities is intended to portray the City's positions on a variety of issues and to communicate to Lakeville's residents, legislators, county and state officials, lobbying organizations and other interested parties Lakeville's position on a variety of significant legislative topics. Attached for your review is a redlined copy of the 2013 Legislative Priorities indicating the proposed changes for 2014, as well as a clean copy of the 2014 priorities for ease of reading. The legislative policies are divided into five categories including municipal revenue and taxation, transportation, housing, economic development and general legislation. A memo from Fire Chief Mike Meyer is also attached for your consideration regarding possible legislation related to the installation of sprinklers in new single family and multi - family homes. Changes in the 2014 Legislative Priorities includes updated verbiage regarding the Homestead Market Value Exclusion Program, Sales Tax on All Local Government Purchases, Relieve Congestion on 1 -35 Through Lakeville, Tax Increment Financing and on Residential Sprinkler Code Requirements. New priorities added for 2014 include support for legislation addressing MnDOT Maintenance Budget - to take full responsibility for maintaining state owned infrastructure within cities, Street Improvement Districts - to provide local authority to establish street improvement districts and Water Resources Management - to improve the coordination and regulation of water resource across regulatory authorities. Opposition to potential legislation regarding the Recycling Refund Program for Beverage Containers was also added to the 2014 Legislative Priorities due to the potential financial burden and logistical issues related to the program. City staff will be available to review and discuss the draft 2014 Legislative Priorities at the January 28th City Council work session. If you have any questions before the work session, please contact us. City of Lakeville 20143 Legislative Priorities BFI �.�..�� 1 ,.. kA, Adopted February , 201 City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities ExecutiveSummary ................................................ ..............................3 I. Municipal Revenue & Taxation .................................. ............................... 3 A. Levy Limits B. Homestead Market Value Exclusion Program C. Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution D. Sales Tax on All Local Government Purchases E. Targeting Property Tax Relief Directly to Individuals II . Transportation ........................................................ ............................... 5 A. Transit Operations and Taxing District B. Transportation System Improvement and Maintenance Funding B-. MnDOT Maintenance Budget D. Public Infrastructure Utilities G E. Street Improvement Districts D, F. Relieve Congestion Along 1 -35 through Lakeville €.G. Dan Patch Commuter Rail Corridor III. Economic Development ............................................ ............................... 3 A. Tax Increment Financing B. State Development Programs IV . Housing .................................................................. ..............................9 A. City Role in Housing B. City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing C. Residential Sprinkler Code Requirements V. General Legislation ................................................ ............................... 40 A. Administrative Citations B. Sunday Sales C. Growler Sa Recycling Refund Program for Beverage Containers D. Funding to Manage Shade Tree Disease and Pests E. Franchising fempet+tive -Cable Service Providers F. Mandates & Local Authority G. Elected Metropolitan Council H. Storage of Railroad Cars Within Urban Residential Areas I. Donation /Acquisition of DNR Tax Forfeit Property J. Data Requests f9F Citizens GentaGtWater Resources Management lnfeFinatien City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities Executive Summary - 2014 Legislative Priorities VI. Municipal Revenue & Taxation F. Levy Limits - The City of Lakeville strongly opposes levy limits and other forms of levy restrictions imposed upon local aovernments. G. Homestead Market Value Exclusion Program - The City of Lakeville opposes restoration of the former Market Value Homestead Credit, and encourages elimination of the exclusion program. H. Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution - The City of Lakeville supports the Fiscal Disparities Program and opposes any diversion from the fiscal disparities pool to fund specific programs or protects. I. Sales Tax on All Local Government Purchases - The City of Lakeville supports further clarifications and adjustments to the sales tax exemptions as passed during the 2013 legislative session. Targeting Property Tax Relief Directly to Individuals - The City supports targeting property tax relief directly to individuals as opposed to direct aid programs like Local Government Aid (LGA). VII. Transportation A. Transit Operations and Taxing District - The City of Lakeville opposes the State imposing the Transit Taxing District upon cities. The City of Lakeville supports fundina of all transit capital expenses and operatina subsidies throuah the use of Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST) revenues or other statewide revenue B Transportation System Improvement and Maintenance Funding - The City of Lakeville supports State efforts to bolster financial resources needed to address road and highway improvements. C. MnDOT Maintenance Budget - The City of Lakeville supports MnDOT taking full responsibility for maintainina state owned infrastructure within city limits. D. Public Infrastructure Utilities - The Legislature should authorize cities to create, as a local option, additional utilities such as a transportation or sidewalk utility. Street Improvement Districts - The City of Lakeville supports the authority of local units of aovernment to establish street improvement districts. Relieve Congestion along 1 -35 through Lakeville - Lakeville strongly encourages MnDOT and the Metropolitan Council to find ways to reduce congestion improve safety and increase transit options on 1 -35 through Lakeville. G. Dan Patch Commuter Rail Corridor - Lakeville supports upholdina the current law banning the study, planning, design or engineering of the Dan Patch Corridor for commuter rail purposes. VIII. Economic Development A. Tax Increment Financing - Lakeville supports adding more time to the TIF flexibility aiven in the 2010 Jobs -State Stimulus bill for an additional two vears and recommends the Leaislature consider expandina the use of TIF. City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities B. State Development Programs - Lakeville supports continued State funding for Business Development Programs. IX. Housing D. City Role in Housing - Lakeville strongly opposes any effort to reduce, alter or interfere with cities' authority to properly provide land -use planning, zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations based on the current housing stock, demographics, and market conditions. a. City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing — Lakeville supports affordable and life cycle housing. F Residential Sprinkler Code Requirements - Lakeville recommends the State reject the International Building Code provision that would require the installation of fire sprinklers in new single- family and two - family homes. X. General Legislation K. Administrative Citations - Lakeville supports the use of city administrative fines for local regulatory ordinances. L. Sunday Sales - The City of Lakeville is opposed to any legislation that would allow off -sale Sundav sales of alcohol. M. Recycling Refund Program for Beverage Containers - The City of Lakeville opposes any legislation that creates a recycling refund program for beverage containers. N. Funding to Manage Shade Tree Disease and Pests — Lakeville supports state funding that would assist cities with meeting the costs of addressing shade tree disease and pest problems. O. Franchising Cable Service Providers - Lakeville supports changes to the existing federal or state cable franchising statutes that fully maintain local authority and assure that all providers meet community needs and interests. P. Mandates & Local Authority - Lakeville opposes statutory changes which erode local control and authority or create mandated additional tasks requiring new or added local costs without a corresponding state appropriation or funding mechanism. Q. Elected Metropolitan Council - The City of Lakeville supports the appointment of Metropolitan Council members by the Governor with four year, staggered terms for members. R. Storage of Railroad Cars Within Urban Residential Areas - Minnesota's Federal Congressional Representatives should initiate legislative actions to create laws or rules that would prohibit the current practice of storing railroad cars within urbanized residential neighborhoods without the consent of the City. S. Donation /Acquisition of DNR Tax Forfeit Property - Lakeville supports revised legislation to streamline the process to allow the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to quickly and efficiently transfer tax forfeiture properties to local government units. T. Water Resources Management - The City of Lakeville supports efforts to review and better align water resource management in the state, to make the system more straight - forward and easy to use without jeopardizing water quality. City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities Municipal Revenue & Taxation A. Levy Limits Position The City of Lakeville strongly opposes levy limits and other forms of levy restrictions imposed upon local governments. Background: Lakeville believes the best decisions for local matters, including levels of property taxation, are best made by locally elected officials. The imposition of broad State mandates such as levy limits, "taxpayer's bill of rights ", valuation freezes, payroll freezes, reverse referenda, fund balance restrictions and other limitations to the local government budget and taxing process can impose financial hardships on communities. Levy limits undermine local budgeting processes, planned growth, and the relationship between locally elected officials and their residents by having the State determine the appropriate level of local taxation and services, despite varying local conditions and circumstances. B. Homestead Market Value Exclusion Program '• • 1111111 • •••• • • • • Homestead Credit, and encourag elimination of the exclusion program, as the program shifts taxes onto other property classes and further complicates the prope tax system. The Gity of Lakeville eppe .. A. ft .01111 -p-MMS ME .. .. Background The 2011 Legislature repealed the Market Value Homestead Credit (MVHC) and established a Market Value Homestead Exclusion (MVHE) Program. The intent of both programs is to provide property tax relief to qualifying 5 City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities homesteads, the former MVHC through credits on local government tax bills and the new MVHE through reductions in property tax values. Under the former MVHC, the state reimbursed local governments in exchange for reducing the taxable value of qualifying properties. The MVHE program pays for the property tax relief by shifting property taxes within jurisdictions. The 2013 legislative session enacted statutory chanqes to clarify the application of levy limits under the program. in 2011, new state laws establ a Market Value Homestead EXG'usien Program, and repealed the Market Value Hernestead Gredit. The intent of both programs was te pmvide prepeFty tax relief to qualifying hernesteads, the forme redUGt*E)RS iR property tax values. Under the former MVHG, the state Feimbw Kepe rti. The ReW pFegram pays for the property tax relief by shiftiRg C. Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution Position The City of Lakeville supports the Fiscal Disparities Program and opposes any diversion from the fiscal disparities pool to fund specific programs or projects, as this would contradict the purposes of the program. Background The Twin Cities Area Fiscal Disparities Program, enacted in 1971, was created for the purposes of: • Providing a way for local governments to share in the resources generated by the growth of the metropolitan area without removing existing resources. • To promote orderly development of the region by reducing the impact of fiscal considerations on the location of business and infrastructure. • To establish incentives for all parts of the area to work for the growth of the area as a whole. • To help communities at various stages of development. • To encourage protection of the environment by reducing the impact of fiscal considerations to ensure protection of parks, open space, and wetlands. The 2011 legislative study of Fiscal Disparities, which Metro Cities participated in and supported, has stimulated discussion of the program at the Legislature, and Metro Cities anticipates modifications to the program to be proposed in the 2013 legislative session. Legislation that would modify or impact the fiscal disparities program should only be considered within a framework of comprehensive reform efforts to the state's property tax, aids and credits system. Any proposed legislation that would modify or impact the fiscal disparities program must be evaluated utilizing the criteria of fairness, equity, stability, transparency and coherence in the treatment of cities and taxpayers across the metropolitan region, and must continue to serve the program's intended purposes. 2 City of Lakeville 2011 Legislative Priorities Further studies or task forces to consider modifications to the fiscal disparities program must include participation and input from metropolitan local government representatives. D. Sales Tax on All Local Government Purchases Position The City of Lakeville supports the following clarifications and adjustments to the sales tax exemptions as passed during the 2013 leaislative session: • Clarifying the eligibility of purchases by all joint powers entities and agreements so that purchases are exempt as long as the service provided is a service primarily provided by a governmental entity, even when there is participation by non - profit organizations or other entities. Purchases by economic development authorities, housing and redevelopment authorities and Dort authorities should also be exempt. • Clarifying which purchases are ineligible for the exemption due to being generally provided by a private business. This clarification should limit taxable purchases to goods or services predominantly provided by private businesses. • Granting an extension of the motor vehicle sales tax exemption that currently applies to marked squad cars and firefighting apparatus to all municipal vehicles that are used for general city functions and are provided by governmental entities. Background The City of Lakeville supports the reinstatement of the sales tax exemption for purchases of goods and services made by cities that was enacted into law in the 2013 legislative session. To ensure that citizens receive the full benefit of this exemption, the new law should treat purchases of all local government units the same, including purchases made by special taxing districts, joint powers entities, or any other agency or instrumentality of local government. City of Lakeville E. Targeting Property Tax Relief Directly to Individuals 20134 Legislative Priorities Position The City supports targeting property tax relief directly to individuals as opposed to direct aid programs like Local Government Aid (LGA) and believes that income not property value is property values are ; most appropriate measure of "ability to pay" property taxes. Background Lakeville supports additional property tax relief to those in greatest need by directing dollars to the circuit breaker program from programs such as Local Government Aid. (LGA). The circuit breaker income adjusted property tax relief program provides direct assistance to those homeowners in greatest need whether or not those local homeowners reside in a city which receives direct aids from the State. Lakeville believes that on a long term basis, the State should focus property tax relief to individual taxpayers instead of local units of government. Such a program provides equitable tax relief to all property tax payers in Minnesota. II. Transportation A. Transit Operations and Taxing District Position The City of Lakeville opposes the State imposing the Transit Taxing District upon cities. The City of Lakeville supports funding of all transit capital expenses and operating subsidies into the State budget through the use of Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST) revenues or other statewide revenue sources. Background The Transit Taxing District is a funding source for capital expenses such as transit stations and buses. These expenses account for about 10% of the cost of operating a transit system. The operating costs of the transit system are paid by all residents of the state through other revenues such as the gas tax and sales tax. The transit taxing district is an unfair tax in that it taxes a small geographic area for a service that is enjoyed by the entire state. The metropolitan transit service area has grown beyond the seven - county region and therefore no manner of regional taxation is sufficient to fairly distribute the cost of the capital expenses. B. Transportation System Improvement and Maintenance Funding 8 City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities Policy The City of Lakeville supports State efforts to bolster financial resources needed to address road and highway improvements. The City of Lakeville also supports efforts to provide cities with adequate tools to provide funding to maintain and improve local roadways. Background Current levels of funding for roads and highways is inadequate to maintain existing road and highway needs and meets the needs of growing areas such as Lakeville. Lakeville recognizes the need for additional transportation funding statewide, and will continue to advocate for additional resources to maintain the State's transportation infrastructure. In addition, cities still lack the authority to use additional tools for city street improvements; such resources continue to be restricted to property taxes and special assessments. It is imperative that alternative authority be granted to municipalities for this purpose to relieve the burden on the property tax system. The City of will be financing more than $4-9 36.9 million of street maintenance and reconstruction projects with property taxes over the next five years. The requisite projects have the potential of resulting in a 3- — 6 6 8 -10 annual increase in property taxes in the coming years. Street maintenance and reconstruction projects will be one of the most significant contributing factors to future property tax increases. This is addition to more than $2-5 35.6 million of project costs financed from other sources such as special assessments and municipal state -aid street funding. C. MnDOT Maintenance Budget Policy: The City of Lakeville supports MnDOT taking full responsibility for maintaining state owned infrastructure within city limits. Background: The state has abrogated its responsibility for maintaining major roads throughout the state by requiring, through omission, that cities bear the burden of maintenance on major state roads. Cities should be compensated equitably for providing a service that traditionally has been borne by the state. MnDOT should also be required to meet standards adopted by cities through local ordinances or reimburse cities for labor, equipment and material used on the state's behalf to improve public safety or meet local standards. C. Public Infrastructure Utilities Position The Legislature should authorize cities to create, as a local option, additional utilities such as a transportation or sidewalk utility. Such authority would acknowledge the effects of repeated levy limits and the general funding shift from the state to local governments for building and maintaining necessary infrastructure; the benefits to all taxpayers of a properly maintained public infrastructure; and, the limitations of existing special assessment authority. E City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities Background Successful economic development efforts and community stability are dependent upon a city's ability to make infrastructure investments. Current infrastructure funding options available to cities are inadequate and unsustainable. Funding pressures have been exacerbated by levy limits, unallotment and reductions in the local government aid and market value homestead credit programs. The existing special assessment law, Minn. Stat. ch. 429, does not meet cities' financing needs because of the benefit requirement. The law requires a minimum of 20 percent of such a project to be specially assessed against affected properties. Alternatives to the Minn. Stat. ch. 429 methods for financing infrastructure improvements are nearly nonexistent. The Legislature has given cities the authority to operate utilities for waterworks, sanitary sewers, and storm sewers. The storm sewer authority, established in 1983, set the precedent for a workable process of charging a use fee on a utility bill for a city service infrastructure that is of value to everyone in a city. Similar to the storm sewer authority, a transportation or sidewalk utility would use technical, well- founded measurements and would equitably distribute the costs of local infrastructure services. E. Street Improvement Districts Policy: The City of Lakeville supports the authority of local units of government to establish street improvement districts and supports changes to special assessment laws to make assessing state -owned property a more predictable process with uniformity in the payment of assessments across the state. Background: Funding sources for local transportation protects are limited to the use of Municipal State Aid (MSA), property taxes and special assessments, and cities under 5,000 in population are not eligible for MSA. With increasing pressures on city budgets and limited tools and resources, cities are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain aging streets. Street improvement districts allow cities in developed and developing areas to fund new construction as well as reconstruction and maintenance efforts. The street improvement district is designed to allow cities, through the use of a fair and objective fee structure, to create a district or districts within the city where fees will be raised but must also be spent. Street improvement districts would also aid cities under 5,000, giving them an alternative to the property tax system and special assessments. D.F. Relieve Congestion Along 1 -35 Through Lakeville Policy Lakeville strongly encourages Mn /DOT and the Metropolitan Council to find ways to reduce congestion improve safety and increase transit options on 1 -35 through Lakeville. mi City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities Background The 1 -35 interstate corridor is one of the busiest and ;= most heavily travelled highway corridors in Minnesota. Significant efforts have been made to reduce congestion, increase safety and improve traffic flow along this vital transportation roadway. Transit improvements made under the Urban Partnership Agreement in 2010 helpeds reduce the growth in traffic congestion by providing an effective alternative to automobile travelers for downtown commuters. But the corridor also feeds many other destinations for automobile and commercial truck traffic. There is a need to expand the capacity of 1 -35 in Lakeville to further increase safety and improve traffic flow. Today there is congestion from the southern berde of Lakeville to County Road 46 due to a shortage of lane capacity. In addition, between 2010 and 2013 hundreds of accidents have occurred along this section of Interstate 35 through Lakeville that have included multiple fatalities. apprex 1 96 GFas s orr ho i d i erren this c 'on of Interstate 35 in 201 0 and 201 1 with feu �ncurr�v rrrcrrr�� i nt erstate fataimtoes. The Federal Highway Administratien haS GOMMeRted previously that The City of Lakeville believes following improvements should be considered: • Additional park and ride facilities should be considered. Within the next five years the Metropolitan Council has determined the Kenrick Station park and ride facility will be at capacity and additional parking for transit riders will be needed. The construction of additional parking capacity will continue to help remove vehicles from the transportation system and reduce overall roadway congestion. • Construction of a third lane from Countv Road 50 to Countv Road 70. The construction of a third lane in this area could serve as a general purpose lane or as an extension of the MnPass lane from its current terminus in Burnsville to County Road 70. Improving this- Interstate 35 +tien-will in Grease- improve safety and capacity and would provide increased regional access to the County Road 70 corridor and take full advantage of the newly completed County Road 70/1 -35 interchange and the Kenrick Avenue park and ride facility promoting continued corporate, office, industrial and commercial growth in this area. ':.G. Dan Patch Commuter Rail Corridor City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities Policy: Lakeville supports upholding the current law banning the study, planning, design or engineering of the Dan Patch Corridor for commuter rail purposes. Background The Dan Patch Corridor is a proposed commuter rail line that would serve a region which runs from Minneapolis to Northfield through the City of Lakeville. It was proposed as a passenger rail line in 2000 after being identified as a "Tier One" corridor in the Minnesota Department of Transportation's 2000 Commuter Rail System Plan. During the 2002 Minnesota legislative session a law was passed that prohibited any future study, planning, design or engineering of the Dan Patch Corridor for commuter rail purposes. Additionally, the law required removing all references, other than references for historical purposes, to the Dan Patch commuter rail line from any future revisions to the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Development Guide and Regional Transit Master Plan, the State Transportation Plan, and the Commissioner of Transportation's Commuter Rail System Plan. III. Economic Development A. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Policy Tax Increment Financing - Lakeville supports adding more time to the TIF flexibility given in the 2010 Jobs -State Stimulus bill for an additional two years and recommends the Legislature consider expanding the use of TIF to assist in the development of technological infrastructure and products, biotechnology, research, transportation and transit oriented development, non - retail commercial protects and modifying the various provisions of existing TIF law in order to better facilitate redevelopment and housing activities. L a k e v ille su pperts adding mere time to the T! F flexibility giveR iR the 201 jobs State Stimulus ball. Background The City of Lakeville has FeGently adopted a '' Strategic Plan for Economic Development. One of the goals of this plan is to—the develep development of a toolbox of incentives to help facilitate economic development in the community. L egislature GeRSider expa ndiR g the use of T I F ass i st i n the dev e l opment - � v hRG of ex T l aw i R order to better faG redevelopmeRt and The League of Minnesota Cities and Economic Development ZI Association of Minnesota have adopted a similar policy on th is- issues. B. State Development Programs 12 City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities Policy Lakeville supports the increased seRtiRued —State funding for Business Development Programs approved during the 2013 Legislature Background Current business development programs include the Minnesota Investment Fund and the Innovative Business Development Public Infrastructure Program administered by DEED and the Transportation Economic Development (TED) and Safety and Mobility Programs (SAM) administered by MnDOT. There will continue to be needs to fund public infrastructure and other aspects of commercial and industrial development that previously were able to be financed with private funding sources. IV. Housing A. City Role in Housing Policy Lakeville strongly opposes any effort to reduce, alter or interfere with cities' authority to properly provide land -use planning, zoning ordinances, and subdivision regulations based on the current housing stock, demographics, and market conditions. Background In the state of Minnesota, the provision of housing is predominantly a private sector, market - driven activity. However, all cities facilitate the development of housing via responsibilities in the areas of land -use planning, zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations. Many cities choose to play an additional role by providing financial incentives and regulatory relief, participating in state and regional housing programs and supporting either local or countywide housing and redevelopment authorities. Cities are also responsible for ensuring the health and safety of local residents and the structural soundness and livability of the local housing stock via enforcement of the State Building Code. B. City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing Policy Lakeville supports affordable and life cycle housing and recognizes that they are important to the economic and social well being of individual communities and the region. Funding for affordable housing is the responsibility of state and federal governments and should not be borne by local property tax payers. In addition, the City opposes any mandated affordable housing requirements. Background Cities can facilitate the production and preservation of affordable and lifecycle housing by: • Applying for state or federal funding from applicable grant and loan programs; • Working with developers and local residents to blend affordable housing into new and existing neighborhoods. • Establish standards that encourage affordable housing. 13 City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities C. Residential Sprinkler Code Requirements Policy Lakeville recommends the State reject the International Building Code provision that would require the installation of fire sprinklers in new single - family and two - family homes Background The 2012 edition of the International Residential Code (IRC) is being evaluated for its possible adoption as the Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1309. The 2012 IRC section R313 contains the requirement for an automatic residential fire sprinkler system to be installed in one and two family dwellings with one exception for additions and alterations to existing buildings that are not already provided with an automatic residential sprinkler system. In 2011 and again in 2012, the Minnesota State Legislature passed bills that would have prohibited the Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) from including the residential fire _sprinkler requirement in the updated Minnesota State Building Code. Governor Dayton vetoed this legislation, allowing the fire sprinkler requirement to be discussed and debated during the rule making process. During the rule making process, the International Residential Code Committee (IRCC), an advisory committee created by DLI, recommended approval of the proposal submitted by Builders Association of Minnesota (BAM) that eliminated the reauirement to install sprinklers in sinale - family homes while retainina the requirement for two - family homes. After several meetings with Fire officials and BAM representatives the Department of Labor and Industry is proposing an exception to the requirement of fire sprinklers for new single- family homes that are less than 4500 square feet excluding the area of the garage. The City of Lakeville did a random sampling of the single family home permits that were issued in 2013 for the months of June, September and December. Of the 88 total single- family home permits issued in those three months 29 homes, or approximately 33 %, were over the 4500 square foot threshold and thus would have required installation of a fire sprinkler system if the provision was adopted. The City of Lakeville estimates that approximately 33% of new homes constructed would be required to have fire sprinkler systems installed to meet the proposed new provision. The Lakeville City Council has adopted a position of being opposed to reauirina fire sprinklers in new sinale- familv and two - family homes for the followina reasons: • The cost of installing fire sprinklers will result in an average cost of $6 -7,000 for a new single family home and will have a direct impact to home affordability. 14 City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities • Twenty -seven (27) states including Iowa, Wisconsin, North and South Dakota have not adopted fire sprinklers for new single family homes. • Homeowners can still choose to install a fire sprinkler system. .. .. .. MINDY .. -e ... .. .. .. L .N .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Orm. . ••. .. e ; V. General Legislation 15 City of Lakeville A. Administrative Citations 20134 Legislative Priorities Policy Lakeville supports the use of city administrative fines for local regulatory ordinances, such as building codes, zoning codes, health codes, public nuisance ordinances, and regulatory matters that are not duplicative of misdemeanor or higher level state traffic and criminal offenses. The Legislature should clarify that both statutory and home rules charter cities have the authority to issue administrative citations for code violations. Further, state statute should allow statutory and home rule charter cities to adjudicate administrative citations and to assess a lien on properties for unpaid administrative fines. Background Many statutory and home rule charter cities have implemented administrative enforcement programs for violations of local regulatory ordinances such as building codes, zoning codes, health codes, and public nuisance ordinances. This use of administrative proceedings has kept enforcement at the local level and reduced pressure on over - burdened district court systems. Cities using administrative enforcement processes experience a lower cost of enforcement and a quicker resolution to code violations. Minnesota statutes expressly provide the authority for all cities to utilize administrative enforcement of local codes and enforcement of liquor license and tobacco license violations. In 2009, the Legislature amended Minn. Stat. ch. 169, the chapter of law pertaining to state traffic regulations, to allow cities and counties to issue administrative citations for certain minor traffic offenses. Since the passage of the 2009 administrative traffic citations law, some people have questioned whether administrative citations for nontraffic, liquor, and tobacco license code violations can be legally issued by statutory cities given that state law does not expressly provide authority on other code matters. B. Sunday Sales Policy The City of Lakeville is opposed to any legislation that would allow off -sale Sunday sales of alcohol. Background The City of Lakeville is a member the Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association. The Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association has taken the position to oppose Sunday sales, as has the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association. There are two groups pushing this agenda, the DISCUS — Distilled Spirits Council of the United States which is a national distilled spirits association (not to be confused with our wholesalers and distributors who oppose the legislation), and a small advocacy group called the Minnesota Beer Activists (this is not an industry association, it is a group of beer advocates that believe Sunday sales is philosophically beneficial to their personal lives). Advocates of the legislation state that Sunday sales has the potential to increase state revenue on liquor taxes to increase by 5 -7 %. This has not been the case in the states that have allowed Sunday sales. In addition, in the State of New Mexico 16 City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities where the legislation was changed to allow Sunday sales, two separate studies have been completed that has proven that Sunday sales have been associated with increased traffic deaths and has negatively impacted health care providers, insurers, law enforcement and the judicial systems. In fact the impacts were so negatively impacting public safety so much that some counties have quickly held elections to re- institute bans on Sunday packaged alcohol sales. C. Recycling Refund Program for Beverage Containers Policy The City of Lakeville opposes any legislation that creates a recycling refund oroaram for beveraae containers due to the followina: • Legislatively, the bill could be written in a way that would require the City to serve as a redemption center, which would require additional burdens including a recycling service, logistics and auditing. • Minnesota is already the second highest recycling state in the country behind California, it would be more cost effective to encourage single sort recycling statewide. • It will place a large financial burden on the City's liquor stores, resulting in increased credit card fees in excess $3,000 for all stores combined. Background The MPCA, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency was directed by the Legislature to complete a study and make a recommendation regarding container deposits. The directive is an attempt to achieve an 80% recycling rate in Minnesota. The MPCA recommendation is for a $.10 deposit to be placed on all beverage containers. As the recommendation stands, retailers that sell containers that carry a deposit are not required to serve as a reception center, however, that has not been finalized. 17 City of Lakeville D. Funding to Manage Shade Tree Diseases and Pests 20134 Legislative Priorities Policy Lakeville supports state funding that would assist cities with meeting the costs of addressing shade tree disease and pest problems. Background The resurgence of Dutch Elm Disease, the spread of Oak Wilt and the growing Emerald Ash Borer infestation have brought about a significantly increased need for city tree removal services. Consequently, this has put fiscal pressure on city budgets at a time when many are still experiencing aid cuts. Although the Department of Natural Resources' ReLeaf program and the Department of Agriculture's Shade Tree and Invasive Species program currently allow for addressing tree disease and pest problems, funding levels have been inadequate to assist cities. Cities share the goal of the state's ReLeaf program — promoting and funding the planting, maintenance, and improvement of trees in the state. By not having the resources to take preventative steps to halt fast - spreading diseases by removing infected trees in a timely manner, it ends up costing cities significantly more in the long run. E. Franchising Competitive Cable Service Providers Policy Lakeville supports changes to the existing federal or state cable franchising statutes that fully maintain local authority and assure that all providers meet community needs and interests, including PEG channel capacity, funding and institutional networks (I -Nets) consistent with up -to -date technology and tailored to reasonable technical and operational differences among providers. Background Under current state law, local franchising authorities must adopt agreements that are "no more favorable or less burdensome" with regard to area served, public, educational and government (PEG) programming and franchise fees. The state Legislature and Congress should recognize and support increased flexibility in the exercise of local franchising authority in order to encourage entry by competitive multi - channel video service providers, without giving unfair advantage to one provider over another. Local franchising authorities need flexibility to take advantage of opportunities to provide increased customer choice while requiring a measure designed to prevent economic, racial or other discriminatory redlining or "cherry- picking" that could result in creation of a "digital divide" within the community. F. Mandates & Local Authority 1s City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities Policy Lakeville opposes statutory changes which erode local control and authority or create mandated additional tasks requiring new or added local costs without a corresponding state appropriation or funding mechanism. New unfunded mandates cause increased property taxes which impede cities' ability to fund traditional service needs. G. Elected Metropolitan Council Policy The City of Lakeville supports the appointment of Metropolitan Council members by the Governor with four year, staggered terms for members. The appointment of the Metropolitan Council Chair should coincide with the term of the Governor. Background The Metropolitan Council is the regional planning agency serving the Twin Cities seven - county metropolitan area and providing essential services to the region. The 17- member Metropolitan Council has 16 members who each represent a geographic district and one chair serving at large. They are all appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the governor. The State Senate confirms Council member appointments. H. Storage of Railroad Cars Within Urban Residential Areas Policv Minnesota's Federal Congressional Representatives should initiate legislative actions to create laws or rules that would prohibit the current practice of storing railroad cars within urbanized residential neighborhoods without the express written consent of the City. Background An active but little used section of freight railroad track runs through the City of Lakeville and a majority of the track runs through residential neighborhoods or is adjacent to residential homes. While the railroad track is classified as an active line several sections are in poor condition and are not used. Therefore, the tracks are being used for the storage of inactive rail cars in accordance with current Federal authority without any limits as to the amount of time that they may be stored. Adjacent residential property owners are experiencing detrimental effects on their homes and neighborhoods due to the storage of these railroad cars including visual blight impacts affecting residential home values, safety of children and general welfare of the community. Lakeville City Council passed a resolution in 2009 requesting Minnesota's Federal Congressional Representatives initiate legislative actions to address this issue. I. Donation /Acquisition of DNR Tax Forfeit Property Policy Lakeville supports revised legislation to streamline the process to allow the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to quickly and efficiently transfer tax forfeiture properties to local government units. 19 City of Lakeville 20134 Legislative Priorities Background There are several parcels throughout the City of Lakeville currently owned by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources that were acquired through tax forfeiture. Many of these parcels are adjacent to lakes or wetlands and are not developable. Many of these properties would provide natural open space areas, passive parks or space for the construction of trail connections to city and regional trail systems. The DNR is currently working to transfer these properties to the local government units where they are located. J. Water Resources Management Policy: The City of Lakeville supports efforts to review and better align water resource management in the state, to make the system more straight - forward and easy to use without jeopardizing water quality. The City of Lakeville further supports when the legislature considers actions that effects water management, such as permitting and storm water regulations, legislators first consider the impact on local government, and include local officials in any process that would affect them as important stakeholders. Background: The current system is burdensome, confusing and inefficient to local officials who must work within the system to facilitate growth and development and who are working to ensure a healthy natural environment. A bipartisan taskforce of local, county, state, and private sector officials should be created to address the overlapping, duplicative, and conflicting requirements in the current system and provide a recommendation on legislation to reduce and better align agency oversight. 20 City of Lakeville 2014 Legislative Priorities i Pq t f u► 11 6 1 , M1 Adopted February , 2014 Index Executive Summary ......................................................... ..............................3 I. Municipal Revenue & Taxation .................................... ..............................5 A. Levy Limits B. Homestead Market Value Exclusion Program C. Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution D. Sales Tax on All Local Government Purchases E. Targeting Property Tax Relief Directly to Individuals Il . Transportation ......................................................... ..............................7 A. Transit Operations and Taxing District B. Transportation System Improvement and Maintenance Funding C. MnDOT Maintenance Budget D. Public Infrastructure Utilities E. Street Improvement Districts F. Relieve Congestion Along 1 -35 through Lakeville G. Dan Patch Commuter Rail Corridor Ill. Economic Development ............................................. .............................10 A. Tax Increment Financing B. State Development Programs IV . Housing .................................................................. .............................11 A. City Role in Housing B. City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing C. Residential Sprinkler Code Requirements V. General Legislation ................................................... .............................12 A. Administrative Citations B. Sunday Sales C. Recycling Refund Program for Beverage Containers D. Funding to Manage Shade Tree Disease and Pests E. Franchising Cable Service Providers F. Mandates & Local Authority G. Elected Metropolitan Council H. Storage of Railroad Cars Within Urban Residential Areas I. Donation /Acquisition of DNR Tax Forfeit Property J. Water Resources Management Executive Summary I. Municipal Revenue & Taxation F. Levy Limits - The City of Lakeville strongly opposes levy limits and other forms of levy restrictions imposed upon local governments. G. Homestead Market Value Exclusion Program - The City of Lakeville opposes restoration of the former Market Value Homestead Credit, and encourages elimination of the exclusion program. H. Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution - The City of Lakeville supports the Fiscal Disparities Program and opposes any diversion from the fiscal disparities pool to fund specific programs or projects. I. Sales Tax on All Local Government Purchases - The City of Lakeville supports further clarifications and adjustments to the sales tax exemptions as passed during the 2013 legislative session. J. Targeting Property Tax Relief Directly to Individuals - The City supports targeting property tax relief directly to individuals as opposed to direct aid programs like Local Government Aid (LGA). 11. Transportation A. Transit Operations and Taxing District - The City of Lakeville opposes the State imposing the Transit Taxing District upon cities. The City of Lakeville supports funding of all transit capital expenses and operating subsidies through the use of Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST) revenues or other statewide revenue sources. B. Transportation System Improvement and Maintenance Funding - The City of Lakeville supports State efforts to bolster financial resources needed to address road and highway improvements. C. MnDOT Maintenance Budget - The City of Lakeville supports MnDOT taking full responsibility for maintaining state owned infrastructure within city limits. D. Public Infrastructure Utilities - The Legislature should authorize cities to create, as a local option, additional utilities such as a transportation or sidewalk utility. E. Street Improvement Districts - The City of Lakeville supports the authority of local units of government to establish street improvement districts. F. Relieve Congestion along 1 -35 through Lakeville - Lakeville strongly encourages MnDOT and the Metropolitan Council to find ways to reduce congestion improve safety and increase transit options on 1 -35 through Lakeville. G. Dan Patch Commuter Rail Corridor - Lakeville supports upholding the current law banning the study, planning, design or engineering of the Dan Patch Corridor for commuter rail purposes. III. Economic Development A. Tax Increment Financing - Lakeville supports adding more time to the TIF flexibility given in the 2010 Jobs -State Stimulus bill for an additional two years and recommends the Legislature consider expanding the use of TIF. B. State Development Programs - Lakeville supports continued State funding for Business Development Programs. IV. Housing D. City Role in Housing - Lakeville strongly opposes any effort to reduce, alter or interfere with cities' authority to properly provide land -use planning, zoning ordinances, and subdivision regulations based on the current housing stock, demographics, and market conditions. E. City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing — Lakeville supports affordable and life cycle housing. F. Residential Sprinkler Code Requirements - Lakeville recommends the State reject the International Building Code provision that would require the installation of fire sprinklers in new single - family and two- family homes. V. General Legislation K. Administrative Citations - Lakeville supports the use of city administrative fines for local regulatory ordinances. L. Sunday Sales - The City of Lakeville is opposed to any legislation that would allow off -sale Sunday sales of alcohol. M. Recycling Refund Program for Beverage Containers - The City of Lakeville opposes any legislation that creates a recycling refund program for beverage containers. N. Funding to Manage Shade Tree Disease and Pests — Lakeville supports state funding that would assist cities with meeting the costs of addressing shade tree disease and pest problems. O. Franchising Cable Service Providers - Lakeville supports changes to the existing federal or state cable franchising statutes that fully maintain local authority and assure that all providers meet community needs and interests. P. Mandates & Local Authority - Lakeville opposes statutory changes which erode local control and authority or create mandated additional tasks requiring new or added local costs without a corresponding state appropriation or funding mechanism. Q. Elected Metropolitan Council - The City of Lakeville supports the appointment of Metropolitan Council members by the Governor with four year, staggered terms for members. R. Storage of Railroad Cars Within Urban Residential Areas - Minnesota's Federal Congressional Representatives should initiate legislative actions to create laws or rules that would prohibit the current practice of storing railroad cars within urbanized residential neighborhoods without the consent of the City. S. Donation /Acquisition of DNR Tax Forfeit Property - Lakeville supports revised legislation to streamline the process to allow the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to quickly and efficiently transfer tax forfeiture properties to local government units. T. Water Resources Management - The City of Lakeville supports efforts to review and better align water resource management in the state, to make the system more straight - forward and easy to use without jeopardizing water quality. 4 2014 Legislative Priorities I. Municipal Revenue & Taxation A. Levy Limits Position The City of Lakeville strongly opposes levy limits and other forms of levy restrictions imposed upon local governments. Background: Lakeville believes the best decisions for local matters, including levels of property taxation, are best made by locally elected officials. The imposition of broad State mandates such as levy limits, "taxpayer's bill of rights ", valuation freezes, payroll freezes, reverse referenda, fund balance restrictions and other limitations to the local government budget and taxing process can impose financial hardships on communities. Levy limits undermine local budgeting processes, planned growth, and the relationship between locally elected officials and their residents by having the State determine the appropriate level of local taxation and services, despite varying local conditions and circumstances. B. Homestead Market Value Exclusion Program Position The City of Lakeville opposes restoration of the former Market Value Homestead Credit, and encourages elimination of the exclusion program, as the program shifts taxes onto other property classes and further complicates the property tax system. Background The 2011 Legislature repealed the Market Value Homestead Credit (MVHC) and established a Market Value Homestead Exclusion (MVHE) Program. The intent of both programs is to provide property tax relief to qualifying homesteads, the former MVHC through credits on local government tax bills and the new MVHE through reductions in property tax values. Under the former MVHC, the state reimbursed local governments in exchange for reducing the taxable value of qualifying properties. The MVHE program pays for the property tax relief by shifting property taxes within jurisdictions. The 2013 legislative session enacted statutory changes to clarify the application of levy limits under the program. C. Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution Position The City of Lakeville supports the Fiscal Disparities Program and opposes any diversion from the fiscal disparities pool to fund specific programs or projects, as this would contradict the purposes of the program. Background The Twin Cities Area Fiscal Disparities Program, enacted in 1971, was created for the purposes of: • Providing a way for local governments to share in the resources generated by the growth of the metropolitan area without removing existing resources. • To promote orderly development of the region by reducing the impact of fiscal considerations on the location of business and infrastructure. • To establish incentives for all parts of the area to work for the growth of the area as a whole. • To help communities at various stages of development. • To encourage protection of the environment by reducing the impact of fiscal considerations to ensure protection of parks, open space, and wetlands. The 2011 legislative study of Fiscal Disparities, which Metro Cities participated in and supported, has stimulated discussion of the program at the Legislature, and Metro Cities anticipates modifications to the program to be proposed in the 2013 legislative session. Legislation that would modify or impact the fiscal disparities program should only be considered within a framework of comprehensive reform efforts to the state's property tax, aids and credits system. Any proposed legislation that would modify or impact the fiscal disparities program must be evaluated utilizing the criteria of fairness, equity, stability, transparency and coherence in the treatment of cities and taxpayers across the metropolitan region, and must continue to serve the program's intended purposes. Further studies or task forces to consider modifications to the fiscal disparities program must include participation and input from metropolitan local government representatives. D. Sales Tax on All Local Government Purchases Position The City of Lakeville supports the following clarifications and adjustments to the sales tax exemptions as passed during the 2013 legislative session: • Clarifying the eligibility of purchases by all joint powers entities and agreements so that purchases are exempt as long as the service provided is a service primarily provided by a governmental entity, even when there is participation by non - profit organizations or other entities. Purchases by economic development authorities, housing and redevelopment authorities and port authorities should also be exempt. • Clarifying which purchases are ineligible for the exemption due to being generally provided by a private business. This clarification should limit taxable purchases to goods or services predominantly provided by private businesses. • Granting an extension of the motor vehicle sales tax exemption that currently applies to marked squad cars and firefighting apparatus to all municipal vehicles that are used for general city functions and are provided by governmental entities. Background The City of Lakeville supports the reinstatement of the sales tax exemption for purchases of goods and services made by cities that was enacted into law in the 2013 legislative session. To ensure that citizens receive the full benefit of this exemption, the new law should treat purchases of all local government units the 6 same, including purchases made by special taxing districts, joint powers entities, or any other agency or instrumentality of local government. E. Targeting Property Tax Relief Directly to Individuals Position The City supports targeting property tax relief directly to individuals as opposed to direct aid programs like Local Government Aid (LGA) and believes that income not property value is the most appropriate measure of "ability to pay" property taxes. Background Lakeville supports additional property tax relief to those in greatest need by directing dollars to the circuit breaker program from programs such as Local Government Aid. (LGA). The circuit breaker income adjusted property tax relief program provides direct assistance to those homeowners in greatest need whether or not those local homeowners reside in a city which receives direct aids from the State. Lakeville believes that on a long term basis, the State should focus property tax relief to individual taxpayers instead of local units of government. Such a program provides equitable tax relief to all property tax payers in Minnesota. II. Transportation A. Transit Operations and Taxing District Position The City of Lakeville opposes the State imposing the Transit Taxing District upon cities. The City of Lakeville supports funding of all transit capital expenses and operating subsidies into the State budget through the use of Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MUST) revenues or other statewide revenue sources. Background The Transit Taxing District is a funding source for capital expenses such as transit stations and buses. These expenses account for about 10% of the cost of operating a transit system. The operating costs of the transit system are paid by all residents of the state through other revenues such as the gas tax and sales tax. The transit taxing district is an unfair tax in that it taxes a small geographic area for a service that is enjoyed by the entire state. The metropolitan transit service area has grown beyond the seven - county region and therefore no manner of regional taxation is sufficient to fairly distribute the cost of the capital expenses. B. Transportation System Improvement and Maintenance Funding Policy The City of Lakeville supports State efforts to bolster financial resources needed to address road and highway improvements. The City of Lakeville also supports efforts to provide cities with adequate tools to provide funding to maintain and improve local roadways. Background Current levels of funding for roads and highways is inadequate to maintain existing road and highway needs and meets the needs of growing areas such as Lakeville. Lakeville recognizes the need for additional transportation funding statewide, and will continue to advocate for additional resources to maintain the State's transportation infrastructure. In addition, cities still lack the authority to use additional tools for city street improvements; such resources continue to be restricted to property taxes and special assessments. It is imperative that alternative authority be granted to municipalities for this purpose to relieve the burden on the property tax system. The City of will be financing more than $ 36.9 million of street maintenance and reconstruction projects with property taxes over the next five years. The requisite projects have the potential of resulting in a — 8 -10% annual increase in property taxes in the coming years. Street maintenance and reconstruction projects will be one of the most significant contributing factors to future property tax increases. This is addition to more than $ 35.6 million of project costs financed from other sources such as special assessments and municipal state -aid street funding. C. MnDOT Maintenance Budget Policy: The City of Lakeville supports MnDOT taking full responsibility for maintaining state owned infrastructure within city limits. Background: The state has abrogated its responsibility for maintaining major roads throughout the state by requiring, through omission, that cities bear the burden of maintenance on major state roads. Cities should be compensated equitably for providing a service that traditionally has been borne by the state. MnDOT should also be required to meet standards adopted by cities through local ordinances or reimburse cities for labor, equipment and material used on the state's behalf to improve public safety or meet local standards. D. Public Infrastructure Utilities Position The Legislature should authorize cities to create, as a local option, additional utilities such as a transportation or sidewalk utility. Such authority would acknowledge the effects of repeated levy limits and the general funding shift from the state to local governments for building and maintaining necessary infrastructure; the benefits to all taxpayers of a properly maintained public infrastructure; and, the limitations of existing special assessment authority. Background Successful economic development efforts and community stability are dependent upon a city's ability to make infrastructure investments. Current infrastructure funding options available to cities are inadequate and unsustainable. Funding pressures have been exacerbated by levy limits, unallotment and reductions in the local government aid and market value homestead credit programs. The existing special assessment law, Minnesota State Statute Chapter 429, does not meet cities' financing needs because of the benefit requirement. The law requires a minimum of 20 percent of such a project to be specially assessed against affected properties. Alternatives to the Minnesota State Statute Chapter 429 methods for financing infrastructure improvements are nearly nonexistent. The Legislature has given cities the authority to operate utilities for waterworks, sanitary sewers, and storm sewers. The storm sewer authority, established in 1983, set the precedent for a workable process of charging a use fee on a utility bill for a city service infrastructure that is of value to everyone in a city. Similar to the storm sewer authority, a transportation or sidewalk utility would use technical, well- founded measurements and would equitably distribute the costs of local infrastructure services. E. Street Improvement Districts Policy: The City of Lakeville supports the authority of local units of government to establish street improvement districts and supports changes to special assessment laws to make assessing state -owned property a more predictable process with uniformity in the payment of assessments across the state. Background Funding sources for local transportation projects are limited to the use of Municipal State Aid (MSA), property taxes and special assessments, and cities under 5,000 in population are not eligible for MSA. With increasing pressures on city budgets and limited tools and resources, cities are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain aging streets. Street improvement districts allow cities in developed and developing areas to fund new construction as well as reconstruction and maintenance efforts. The street improvement district is designed to allow cities, through the use of a fair and objective fee structure, to create a district or districts within the city where fees will be raised but must also be spent. Street improvement districts would also aid cities under 5,000, giving them an alternative to the property tax system and special assessments. F. Relieve Congestion Along 1 -35 Through Lakeville Policy Lakeville strongly encourages MnDOT and the Metropolitan Council to find ways to reduce congestion, improve safety and increase transit options on 1 -35 through Lakeville. Background The 1 -35 interstate corridor is one of the busiest and most heavily travelled highway corridors in Minnesota. Significant efforts have been made to reduce congestion, increase safety and improve traffic flow along this vital transportation roadway. Transit improvements made under the Urban Partnership Agreement in 2010 helped reduce the growth in traffic congestion by providing an effective alternative to automobile travelers for downtown commuters. But the corridor also feeds many other destinations for automobile and commercial truck traffic. There is a need to expand the capacity of 1 -35 in Lakeville to further increase safety and improve traffic flow. Today there is congestion from south of Lakeville to County Road 46 due to a shortage of lane capacity. In addition, between 2010 and 2013 hundreds of accidents have occurred along this section of Interstate 35 through Lakeville that have included multiple fatalities.. The City of Lakeville believes following improvements should be considered: Additional park and ride facilities should be considered. Within the next five years the Metropolitan Council has determined the Kenrick Station park and ride facility will be at capacity and additional parking for transit riders will be needed. The construction of additional parking capacity will continue to help remove vehicles from the transportation system and reduce overall roadway congestion. • Construction of a third lane from County Road 50 to County Road 70. The construction of a third lane in this area could serve as a general purpose lane or as an extension of the MnPass lane from its current terminus in Burnsville to County Road 70. Improving Interstate 35 will improve safety and capacity and would provide increased regional access to the County Road 70 corridor and take full advantage of the newly completed County Road 70/1 -35 interchange and the Kenrick Avenue park and ride facility promoting continued corporate, office, industrial and commercial growth in this area. G. Dan Patch Commuter Rail Corridor Policy: Lakeville supports upholding the current law banning the study, planning, design or engineering of the Dan Patch Corridor for commuter rail purposes. Background The Dan Patch Corridor is a proposed commuter rail line that would serve a region which runs from Minneapolis to Northfield through the City of Lakeville. It was proposed as a passenger rail line in 2000 after being identified as a "Tier One" corridor in the Minnesota Department of Transportation's 2000 Commuter Rail System Plan. During the 2002 Minnesota legislative session a law was passed that prohibited any future study, planning, design or engineering of the Dan Patch Corridor for commuter rail purposes. Additionally, the law required removing all references, other than references for historical purposes, to the Dan Patch commuter rail line from any future revisions to the Metropolitan Council's Transportation Development Guide and Regional Transit Master Plan, the State Transportation Plan, and the Commissioner of Transportation's Commuter Rail System Plan. III. Economic Development A. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Policv Tax Increment Financing - Lakeville supports adding more time to the TIF flexibility given in the 2010 Jobs -State Stimulus bill for an additional two years and recommends the Legislature consider expanding the use of TIF to assist in the development of technological infrastructure and products, biotechnology, research, transportation and transit oriented development, non - retail commercial projects and modifying the various provisions of existing TIF law in order to better facilitate redevelopment and housing activities. Background The City of Lakeville has a Strategic Plan for Economic Development. One of the goals of this plan is the development of a toolbox of incentives to help facilitate economic development in the community. The League of Minnesota Cities and Economic Development Association of Minnesota have adopted a similar policy on these issues. B. State Development Programs Policy Lakeville supports the increased State funding for Business Development Programs approved during the 2013 Legislature. 10 Background Current business development programs include the Minnesota Investment Fund and the Innovative Business Development Public Infrastructure Program administered by DEED and the Transportation Economic Development (TED) and Safety and Mobility Programs (SAM) administered by MnDOT. There will continue to be needs to fund public infrastructure and other aspects of commercial and industrial development that previously were able to be financed with private funding sources. [I Housing A. City Role in Housing Policy Lakeville strongly opposes any effort to reduce, alter or interfere with cities' authority to properly provide land -use planning, zoning ordinances, and subdivision regulations based on the current housing stock, demographics, and market conditions. Background In the state of Minnesota, the provision of housing is predominantly a private sector, market - driven activity. However, all cities facilitate the development of housing via responsibilities in the areas of land -use planning, zoning ordinances and subdivision regulations. Many cities choose to play an additional role by providing financial incentives and regulatory relief, participating in state and regional housing programs and supporting either local or countywide housing and redevelopment authorities. Cities are also responsible for ensuring the health and safety of local residents and the structural soundness and livability of the local housing stock via enforcement of the State Building Code. B. City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing Policy Lakeville supports affordable and life cycle housing and recognizes that they are important to the economic and social well -being of individual communities and the region. Funding for affordable housing is the responsibility of state and federal governments and should not be borne by local property tax payers. In addition, the City opposes any mandated affordable housing requirements. Background Cities can facilitate the production and preservation of affordable and lifecycle housing by: • Applying for state or federal funding from applicable grant and loan programs; • Working with developers and local residents to blend affordable housing into new and existing neighborhoods. • Establish standards that encourage affordable housing. C. Residential Sprinkler Code Requirements Policy Lakeville recommends the State provision that would require the installation two- family homes. reject the International Building Code of fire sprinklers in new single - family and 11 Background The 2012 edition of the International Residential Code (IRC) is being evaluated for its possible adoption as the Minnesota State Building Code Chapter 1309. The 2012 IRC section R313 contains the requirement for an automatic residential fire sprinkler system to be installed in one and two family dwellings with one exception for additions and alterations to existing buildings that are not already provided with an automatic residential sprinkler system. In 2011 and again in 2012, the Minnesota State Legislature passed bills that would have prohibited the Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) from including the residential fire sprinkler requirement in the updated Minnesota State Building Code. Governor Dayton vetoed this legislation, allowing the fire sprinkler requirement to be discussed and debated during the rule making process. During the rule making process, the International Residential Code Committee (IRCC), an advisory committee created by DLI, recommended approval of the proposal submitted by Builders Association of Minnesota (BAM) that eliminated the requirement to install sprinklers in single - family homes while retaining the requirement for two- family homes. After several meetings with Fire officials and BAM representatives the Department of Labor and Industry is proposing an exception to the requirement of fire sprinklers for new single - family homes that are less than 4500 square feet excluding the area of the garage. The City of Lakeville did a random sampling of the single family home permits that were issued in 2013 for the months of June, September and December. Of the 88 total single - family home permits issued in those three months 29 homes, or approximately 33 %, were over the 4500 square foot threshold and thus would have required installation of a fire sprinkler system if the provision was adopted. The City of Lakeville estimates that approximately 33% of new homes constructed would be required to have fire sprinkler systems installed to meet the proposed new provision. The Lakeville City Council has adopted a position of being opposed to requiring fire sprinklers in new single - family and two- family homes for the following reasons: • The cost of installing fire sprinklers will result in an average cost of $6 -7,000 for a new single family home and will have a direct impact to home affordability. • Twenty -seven (27) states including Iowa, Wisconsin, North and South Dakota have not adopted fire sprinklers for new single family homes. Homeowners can still choose to install a fire sprinkler system. V. General Legislation A. Administrative Citations Policy Lakeville supports the use of city administrative fines for local regulatory ordinances, such as building codes, zoning codes, health codes, public nuisance ordinances, and regulatory matters that are not duplicative of misdemeanor or higher 12 level state traffic and criminal offenses. The Legislature should clarify that both statutory and home rules charter cities have the authority to issue administrative citations for code violations. Further, state statute should allow statutory and home rule charter cities to adjudicate administrative citations and to assess a lien on properties for unpaid administrative fines. Background Many statutory and home rule charter cities have implemented administrative enforcement programs for violations of local regulatory ordinances such as building codes, zoning codes, health codes, and public nuisance ordinances. This use of administrative proceedings has kept enforcement at the local level and reduced pressure on over - burdened district court systems. Cities using administrative enforcement processes experience a lower cost of enforcement and a quicker resolution to code violations. Minnesota statutes expressly provide the authority for all cities to utilize administrative enforcement of local codes and enforcement of liquor license and tobacco license violations. In 2009, the Legislature amended Minn. Stat. ch. 169, the chapter of law pertaining to state traffic regulations, to allow cities and counties to issue administrative citations for certain minor traffic offenses. Since the passage of the 2009 administrative traffic citations law, some people have questioned whether administrative citations for non - traffic, liquor, and tobacco license code violations can be legally issued by statutory cities given that state law does not expressly provide authority on other code matters. B. Sunday Sales Policy The City of Lakeville is opposed to any legislation that would allow off -sale Sunday sales of alcohol. Background The City of Lakeville is a member the Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association. The Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association has taken the position to oppose Sunday sales, as has the Minnesota Licensed Beverage Association. There are two groups pushing this agenda, the DISCUS — Distilled Spirits Council of the United States which is a national distilled spirits association (not to be confused with our wholesalers and distributors who oppose the legislation), and a small advocacy group called the Minnesota Beer Activists (this is not an industry association, it is a group of beer advocates that believe Sunday sales is philosophically beneficial to their personal lives). Advocates of the legislation state that Sunday sales has the potential to increase state revenue on liquor taxes to increase by 5 -7 %. This has not been the case in the states that have allowed Sunday sales. In addition, in the State of New Mexico where the legislation was changed to allow Sunday sales, two separate studies have been completed that has proven that Sunday sales have been associated with increased traffic deaths and has negatively impacted health care providers, insurers, law enforcement and the judicial systems. In fact the impacts were so negatively impacting public safety so much that some counties have quickly held elections to re- institute bans on Sunday packaged alcohol sales. 13 C. Recycling Refund Program for Beverage Containers Policv The City of Lakeville opposes any legislation that creates a recycling refund program for beverage containers due to the following: • Legislatively, the bill could be written in a way that would require the City to serve as a redemption center, which would require additional burdens including a recycling service, logistics and auditing. • Minnesota is already the second highest recycling state in the country behind California, it would be more cost effective to encourage single sort recycling statewide. • It will place a large financial burden on the City's liquor stores, resulting in increased credit card fees in excess $3,000 for all stores combined. Background The MPCA, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency was directed by the Legislature to complete a study and make a recommendation regarding container deposits. The directive is an attempt to achieve an 80% recycling rate in Minnesota. The MPCA recommendation is for a $0.10 deposit to be placed on all beverage containers. As the recommendation stands, retailers that sell containers that carry a deposit are not required to serve as a reception center, however, that has not been finalized. D. Funding to Manage Shade Tree Diseases and Pests Policy Lakeville supports state funding that would assist cities with meeting the costs of addressing shade tree disease and pest problems. Background The resurgence of Dutch Elm disease, the spread of Oak Wilt and the growing Emerald Ash Borer infestation have brought about a significantly increased need for city tree removal services. Consequently, this has put fiscal pressure on city budgets at a time when many are still experiencing aid cuts. Although the Department of Natural Resources' ReLeaf program and the Department of Agriculture's Shade Tree and Invasive Species program currently allow for addressing tree disease and pest problems, funding levels have been inadequate to assist cities. Cities share the goal of the state's ReLeaf program — promoting and funding the planting, maintenance, and improvement of trees in the state. By not having the resources to take preventative steps to halt fast - spreading diseases by removing infected trees in a timely manner, it ends up costing cities significantly more in the long run. E. Franchising Cable Service Providers Policy Lakeville supports changes to the existing federal or state cable franchising statutes that fully maintain local authority and assure that all providers meet community needs and interests, including PEG channel capacity, funding and institutional networks (I -Nets) consistent with up -to -date technology and tailored to reasonable technical and operational differences among providers. 14 Background Under current state law, local franchising authorities must adopt agreements that are "no more favorable or less burdensome" with regard to area served, public, educational and government (PEG) programming and franchise fees. The state Legislature and Congress should recognize and support increased flexibility in the exercise of local franchising authority in order to encourage entry by competitive multi - channel video service providers, without giving unfair advantage to one provider over another. Local franchising authorities need flexibility to take advantage of opportunities to provide increased customer choice while requiring a measure designed to prevent economic, racial or other discriminatory redlining or "cherry- picking" that could result in creation of a "digital divide" within the community. F. Mandates & Local Authority Policy Lakeville opposes statutory changes which erode local control and authority or create mandated additional tasks requiring new or added local costs without a corresponding state appropriation or funding mechanism. New unfunded mandates cause increased property taxes which impede cities' ability to fund traditional service needs. G. Elected Metropolitan Council Policy The City of Lakeville supports the appointment of Metropolitan Council members by the Governor with four year, staggered terms for members. The appointment of the Metropolitan Council Chair should coincide with the term of the Governor. Background The Metropolitan Council is the regional planning agency serving the Twin Cities seven - county metropolitan area and providing essential services to the region. The 17- member Metropolitan Council has 16 members who each represent a geographic district and one chair serving at large. They are all appointed by and serve at the pleasure of the governor. The State Senate confirms Council member appointments. H. Storage of Railroad Cars Within Urban Residential Areas Policy Minnesota's Federal Congressional Representatives should initiate legislative actions to create laws or rules that would prohibit the current practice of storing railroad cars within urbanized residential neighborhoods without the express written consent of the City. Background An active but little used section of freight railroad track runs through the City of Lakeville and a majority of the track runs through residential neighborhoods or is adjacent to residential homes. While the railroad track is classified as an active line several sections are in poor condition and are not used. Therefore, the tracks are being used for the storage of inactive rail cars in accordance with current Federal authority without any limits as to the amount of time that they may be stored. Adjacent residential property owners are experiencing detrimental effects on their homes and neighborhoods due to the storage of these railroad cars including visual blight impacts 15 affecting residential home values, safety of children and general welfare of the community. Lakeville City Council passed a resolution in 2009 requesting Minnesota's Federal Congressional Representatives initiate legislative actions to address this issue. Donation /Acquisition of DNR Tax Forfeit Property Policy Lakeville supports revised legislation to streamline the process to allow the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to quickly and efficiently transfer tax forfeiture properties to local government units. Background There are several parcels throughout the City of Lakeville currently owned by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources that were acquired through tax forfeiture. Many of these parcels are adjacent to lakes or wetlands and are not developable. Many of these properties would provide natural open space areas, passive parks or space for the construction of trail connections to city and regional trail systems. The DNR is currently working to transfer these properties to the local government units where they are located. J. Water Resources Management Policy: The City of Lakeville supports efforts to review and better align water resource management in the state, to make the system more straight - forward and easy to use without jeopardizing water quality. The City of Lakeville further supports when the legislature considers actions that effects water management, such as permitting and storm water regulations, legislators first consider the impact on local government, and include local officials in any process that would affect them as important stakeholders. Background: The current system is burdensome, confusing and inefficient to local officials who must work within the system to facilitate growth and development and who are working to ensure a healthy natural environment. A bipartisan taskforce of local, county, state, and private sector officials should be created to address the overlapping, duplicative, and conflicting requirements in the current system and provide a recommendation on legislation to reduce and better align agency oversight. 16 7 Memorandum To: Steve Mielke, City Administrator Lakeville Mayor and City Council From: Mike Meyer, Fire Chief Copy: Brian Carstensen, Fire Marshal Jay O'Connell, Fire Inspector City of Lakeville Fire Department Date: January 2, 2014 Subject: Minnesota Rule 1309- Proposed Single Family Residential Sprinkler Requirement The Lakeville Fire Department supports the efforts of Minnesota Rule 1309 to have a fire sprinkler protection system in both single and multi - family dwellings. Our fire departments mission statement highlights that we will provide public safety education. The history of the fire service has been to improve safety for the community through changes in fire and building codes. If we look at data, the fire service has seen a decrease of 1.2% in residential structure fires from 1996 to 2005 (U.S. Fire Administration - Residential Structures and Building Fires 2008). Further data shows the number of structure fires have decreased 53% in the last 30 years (Innovating Fire Attacks Tactics UL 2013). The decrease in fires is correlated with improved building and fire codes of single /multi - family homes. When we look at where and how a fire occurs, over 60% of structure fires occur in a single /multi - family homes and 40% of these fires are related to cooking (USFA 2008). Improvements in building and fire codes in new homes has also brought about new construction methods that are referred to as light weight construction. This change in construction of single /multi - family homes has created a very dangerous space when involved in fire for both occupants and first responders. There is limited time that occupants can escape the home and that firefighters can enter the structure. New construction homes burn hotter and faster than homes built 50 years ago and flashover occurs 8 times faster in new homes (UL 2013). There have been documented cases that the structure has failed prior to first responders arriving on scene. Multiple experiments have been conducted by Underwriters Laboratory that compares a new construction home versus a home built in 1970 to 1980. The data from these experiments show that rooms in new construction homes will flashover in less than 5 minutes and floor systems will fail around 6 minutes (Analysis of Changing Residential Fire Dynamics UL 2012). Why do we bring this data forward? With an average response time of 7 to 9 minutes, you can clearly see, the damage within the structure puts all parties including firefighters in a very dangerous situation. The arguments of whether to require residential sprinklers have pros and cons from both sides regarding cost and operation. The decision to support or oppose the requirement needs to be based on facts from both sides. We as a fire department and city should be focused on public safety in all those aspects that apply; this includes the improvements of fire protection systems. Our city has been fortunate that we have experienced very few fire related deaths and injuries. To take a stand against the requirement; goes against our mission statement as a fire department. Only five other cities statewide have publicly opposed this requirement and these cities are border cities. (City of Moorhead, City of East Grandforks, City of Dilworth, City of Breckenridge, City of Ortonville,