HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 06.qL
January 12, 2010 N�vItem No.
CITY OF LAKEVILLE
2010 LEGISLATIVE AGENDA POLICIES
Proposed Action
Staff recommends adoption of the following motion: Move to approve the City of
Lakeville 2010 Legislative Agenda Policies.
Passage of this motion will result in the City publicly stating their position on a variety of
state and local issues.
Overview
As the 2010 Minnesota State Legislature gets underway, there will be many legislative
initiatives and bills. The adoption of legislative priorities is intended to portray the
Lakeville City Council's positions on a variety of issues. This list is not all-encompassing
but represents many of the top priorities.
These policies have been developed 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.
Please find attached a copy of Lakeville's 2010 Legislative Agenda Policies which are
divided into four categories including municipal revenue and taxation, transportation,
housing and economic development, and general legislation.
Primary Issues to Consider
What is the City Council and staff doing to promote the City's positions as
stated in the policies? City Council and staff have been actively involved at
the state and local level attending meetings and educating individuals and
groups about Lakeville's various positions.
Supporting Information
• Copy of the City of Lakeville 2010 Legislative Agenda Policies
Steven C Mielke, City Administrator
Financial Impact: $ N/A Budgeted: Y/N Source:
Related Documents (CIP, ERP, etc.):
Notes:
City of Lakeville
2010 Legislative Agenda Policies
I. Municipal Revenue & Taxation
A. Levy Limits
B. Market Value Homestead Credit
C. Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution
D. Sales Tax on All Local Government Purchases
E. Targeting Property Tax Relief Directly to Individuals
II. Transportation
A. Transit Operations and Taxing District
B. Transportation Funding
C. Relieve Congestion Along Cedar Avenue North of 140th Street
D. Relieve Congestion Along I-35 through Lakeville
III. Housing & Economic Development
A. Inclusionary Housing
B. City Role is Housing
C. City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing
IV. General Legislation
A. Administrative Fines
B. Wine in Grocery
C. Funding to Manage Shade Tree Disease and Pests
D. Franchising Competitive Cable Service Providers
E. Mandates & Local Authority
F. Elected Metropolitan Council
I. Municipal Revenue & Taxation
A. Levy Limits
Position: Lakeville strongly opposes levy limits and urges the legislature to
abolish them.
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 can
impose financial hardships on communities.
The current State imposed levy limit includes a limitation on the amount of
tax base growth allowed in calculating the levy limit. The effect of this
limitation is negative on current property taxpayers and creates a
permanent loss of tax base needed to accommodate providing services to
growing communities such as Lakeville.
B. Market Value Homestead Credit
Position: Lakeville supports eliminating the MVHC program and directing the
resources dedicated to the program as an aid payment directly to
homeowners and to address the State deficit.
Background: As originally established, the market value homestead credit
provides tax relief to homestead property by reducing the homeowner's
property tax bill. Local units of government are subsequently compensated
by the state for the loss of property tax revenue under the credit. In six of
the last eight years the program has been modified by reducing the credit
reimbursement payment to over 100 cities.
Currently, the State spends almost $300 million reimbursing counties, cities
and school districts for MVHC. Based on the $1.2 billion deficit being
projected for FY 2010-11, as well as the significant projected state budget
deficit in FY 2012-13, the City of Lakeville believes it would be prudent to
take a serious look at whether the State can afford the MVHC program.
Savings generated from eliminating this program could be used to help
offset the State budget deficit, as well as to aid homeowners directly on
providing property tax relief. The property tax refund program ("circuit
breaker") could be enhanced by the savings generated from the MVHC
program to provide relief to individuals who need it most (income tested)
regardless of where they live.
The City of Lakeville strongly recommends that the Legislature act this
session (2010) to address the growing state deficit, as well as provide local
governments with budget planning predictability.
Page 2 of 8
C. Fiscal Disparity Fund Distribution
Position: Lakeville opposes the use of fiscal disparities to fund metropolitan
programs since it results in a metropolitan -wide property tax increase
hidden from the public. Lakeville supports the continuation of the fiscal
disparities program in its current form until such time as an appropriate
replacement is developed. Further, Lakeville supports studying the program
to ensure the original intent is being met.
D. Sales Tax on All Local Government Purchases
Position: Lakeville supports the state reinstating the sales tax exemption for
all local government purchases.
Background: When the state was experiencing a budget shortfall in 1992,
the Legislature repealed the sales tax exemption for local government
purchase. Local governments now pay state sales tax on purchases like
road maintenance supplies and equipment, wastewater treatment facilities,
and some public safety equipment. This tax currently costs local property
taxpayers and ratepayers more than $100 million annually. In addition,
proposals to extend the sales tax to services would have the effect of
increasing local government costs and property taxes. Because no
additional state aids were added to offset the additional costs, this repeal
has effectively increased local property taxes to finance state operations. In
recent sessions, there have been city specific requests for exemptions that
have been granted by the legislature including a local wastewater treatment
plant exemption and the legislature has granted several large private
exemptions including an exemption for the new Twins baseball stadium in
Minneapolis.
E. Targeting Property Tax Relief Directly to Individuals
Position: The City supports targeting property tax relief directly to
individuals and believes that property values are not the most appropriate
measure of "ability to pay" property taxes.
Background: As residential home values have rapidly escalated over the
past several years, tens of thousands of Minnesotans, particularly seniors
on fixed incomes, would not financially qualify to purchase the home in
which they live. Many of these Minnesotans live in cities that receive little
or no assistance from the State targeted at reducing property taxes.
Lakeville supports additional property tax relief to those in greatest need by
directing additional dollars to the circuit breaker program. 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
Page 3 of 8
government. Such a program provides equitable tax relief to all property
tax payers in Minnesota.
H. 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 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.
C. Relieve Congestion Along Cedar Avenue North of 140th Street
Policy: In addition to the Cedar Avenue BRT as a way of relieving traffic
congestion on Cedar Avenue, Lakeville strongly encourages Mn/DOT and
Page 4 of 8
Dakota County to expedite efforts to relieve congestion along the
northbound lanes of Cedar Avenue north of 140th St.
Background: Currently, traffic heading out of Apple Valley becomes
congested just north of 140th where it goes from three lanes down to two
lanes. It is then relieved when it opens back up to three lanes north of
Diffley Road. Mn/DOT is currently studying options to relieve congestion
along this stretch of roadway. There is adequate capacity for an additional
lane, which would complete the highway and reduce the congestion.
Heading southbound on Cedar Avenue doesn't have nearly the congestion
during peak hours because unlike the northbound lanes, it's three lanes the
whole way. Regardless of the solution, this bottleneck in traffic needs to be
resolved.
D. Relieve Congestion Along I-35 Through Lakeville
PoPolicy: Lakeville strongly encourages Mn/DOT and the Metropolitan Council
to find ways to reduce congestion on I-35 through Lakeville.
Background: The I-35 interstate corridor is the busiest, most heavily
travelled highway corridor in Minnesota. Significant efforts have been made
to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow along this vital transportation
roadway. Transit improvements made under the Urban Partnership
Agreement will help to reduce the growth in traffic congestion by providing
an effective alternative to automobile travelers to downtown commuters.
But the corridor also feeds many other destinations for automobile and
truck traffic.
Mn/DOT will be constructing an expansion of the northbound MnPass/HOT
lane in Burnsville from the current starting point at the Burnsville Crosstown
to the I-35 split. This expansion project will reduce congestion and improve
traffic flow along this corridor.
But there is also the need to expand the capacity of I-35 in Lakeville. Today
there is congestion from the southern border of Lakeville to County Rd 46
due to a shortage of lane capacity. The Federal Highway Administration has
commented previously that additional lanes are warranted along this stretch
of highway. Improving this condition will be beneficial to the region as it is
the southern gateway to the metropolitan area.
III. Housing & Economic Development
A. Inclusionary Housing
Policy: Lakeville supports the location of affordable housing in residential
and mixed-use neighborhoods throughout a city. However, the City does
not support passage of a mandatory inclusionary housing law that would
require a certain percentage of units in all new housing developments to be
Page 5 of 8
Policy: The City supports the use of city administrative fines, at a minimum,
for regulatory matters that are not duplicative of misdemeanor or higher
level state traffic and criminal offenses. Lakeville also endorses a fair
hearing process before a disinterested third party.
Background: Traditional methods of citation, enforcement and prosecution
have met with ever increasing cost to local units of government and the use
of administrative fines is a tool to moderate those costs. Lakeville supports
the use of administrative fines for local regulatory ordinances, such as
building codes, zoning codes, health codes, minor moving violations up to
10 mph over the limit and public safety and nuisance ordinances.
B. Wine in Grocery
Policy: Lakeville, along with a coalition of private and public organizations,
including the Minnesota Municipal Beverage Association, opposes the WIG
initiative to greatly expand the number of outlets allowed to sell alcohol.
Background: The current laws in Minnesota provide reasonable convenience
to consumers while protecting youth from access to alcoholic beverages.
Allowing the sale of alcoholic beverages in grocery stores will provide easy
opportunity for access by youth.
C. Funding to Manage Shade Tree Diseases and Pests
Policy: Lakeville supports funding for a state matching grant program that
would assist cities with meeting the costs of addressing shade tree disease
and pest problems. Additionally, the City would support funding the current
ReLeaf program with an appropriation that can better address the needs of
managing urban forests across the state.
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.
D. Franchising Competitive Cable Service Providers
Page 7 of 8
affordable to households at a particular income level because these units
can't be produced without a deep developer subsidy or cross -subsidization
from the other houses in the development.
Background: The Metropolitan Council, in creating its affordable housing
targets, must recognize both the opportunities and financial limitations of
cities. The Metro Council should partner with cities to facilitate the creation
of affordable housing through direct financial assistance and/or advocating
for additional resources through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency.
B. 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 building permits and inspections.
C. 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.
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.
IV. General Legislation
1
A. Administrative Fines
Page 6 of 8
Police: 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 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.
E. 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.
F. Elected Metropolitan Council
Policy: Members of the Metropolitan Council should be selected via an open
process that includes an opportunity for local governments and other
stakeholders to provide meaningful input. Council members should
understand and be responsive to the districts they represent while also
serving the best interests of the region. Metropolitan Council members
should serve fixed, staggered terms.
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.
Page 8 of 8