CCP 12-09-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Policv Questions 1. Should the County begin to collect taxes and create an ERF? The 1997 Minnesota Legislature authorized Ramsey and Hennepin Counties to impose a mortgage registry and deed tax for the purpose of creating an Environmental Response Fnnd (ERF). Hennepin County chose to establish an ERF at that time whereas Ramsey County did not. The original legislative authorization was set to expire January 1,2003; however, the 2002 Legislature extended the authority for both Counties for five additional years to January I, 2008. The legislative requirements pertaining to the establishment of an ERF fund by Ramsey County (Section 383A.81) are as follows: I. The County Board must administer the fund either as a county board, a housing and redevelopment authority, or a regional rail authority. 2. The fund must be used for the following purposes: . Acquiring lands or property (through purchase or condemnation) which are polluted or contaminated with hazardous substances; . Paying costs associated with indemnifying or holding harmless the entity taking title to lands or property from any liability arising out of the owncrship, remediation, or use of the land or property; . Paying for the costs of remediating the acquired land or property; . Paying the costs associated with remediating lands or property which are pollutcd or contaminated with hazardous substances; or . Paying for the costs associated with improving the property for economic development, recreational, housing, transportation or rail traffic. 3. The County is expected to seek matching funds from other contamination clean up funds administered by the Commissioner of the Department of Trade and Economic Development, the Metropolitan Council, the federal government, the private sector and any other source. 4. The first priority is to clean up the sites located in the city of St. Paul known as the Dale Street Shops and Maxson Steel, or other sites at or near rail lines that are blighted and the clean-up of which will lead to living wage jobs and, lastly, to improve the land for economic development. NOTE: In a memorandum dated July 14, 1997, the County Attorney issued an opinion on this legislative requirement stating, "This subdivision, however, merely establishes the priorities for Board consideration and is not a mandatory first expenditure. lf the legislature had intended that the funds be used for the cleanup of these sites prior to any other use, such language could have been inserted in the Act." (See attached memorandum.) If the tax had been imposed since August 1997, it would have raised over $2.5 million. Ifit had been imposed in 2001, the taxes would have raised $701,000. This tax could be implemented whenever the County Board chooses, and could be in effect by one month following Board action. /