Laserfiche WebLink
<br />personnel services and consultant fees would be permissible expenses. This previous cap <br />and the proposed new language are meant to ensure that the recycling fee is only used for <br />recycling program expenses. <br />. Instead of labeling the special assessment fee "CITY RECY," the County will now be <br />using the clearer label of "Recycling;" <br />. The existing JP A includes a service charge of up to $.50 per parcel per year to cover the <br />County's costs of administering the City's recycling fee. The new JP A includes the <br />processing fee but it does not include the $.50 per parcel per year cap. Instead, the new <br />IP A states, "The City shall pay the County the actual costs of administering the City's <br />recycling service charge." The Ramsey County Department of Records and Revenue has <br />verified that the fee will remain at $.50 per parcel for 2010, but it could be adjusted in the <br />future. The processing fee is used to cover the costs of processing, collecting, and <br />distributing the fee for the City. One of the reasons cities accept the JP A with Ramsey <br />County is because cities do not have clear statutory authority to certify the fee to property <br />taxes if it is unpaid, which can be done with other utility fees. The cost of the County <br />service charge could be saved if the City opted out of the JP A, but the City would then <br />need to take on the collection, processing, and, if the fees are unpaid, enforcement costs. <br />. The remaining changes are primarily the removal of redundant language already found in <br />State Statutes and other nominal requirements that the County was no longer enforcing or <br />needed. <br /> <br />If the City determines that there is a better method for collecting the fee prior to the expiration of <br />the proposed JPA in 2014, the City can terminate the JPA without cause with 180 days notice to <br />the County. However, the existing system is straightforward, less intensive for City staff, has <br />worked well for the last ten years, and would not change the process for residents or add cost in <br />2010. The City could look at applying the recycling fee to the utility bills in the future, but that <br />would be a change for residents that may require education. Since more staff time would be <br />required if the recycling fee were administered at the City, the savings would likely not be <br />significant. At $.50 per parcel, the County's service fee would be $1,258 for 2010. For future <br />years, staff will obtain the administrative charge in advance of the City's budgeting process so <br />that the City can determine if it is better to stay in the JP A or opt out of the JP A. <br /> <br />The City Attorney has reviewed the JP A and did not have any changes. <br /> <br />Recommendation <br /> <br />Motion to approve the Ramsey County Joint Powers Agreement for Recycling Funding for July <br />1, 2009, through June 30, 2014. <br /> <br />Attachment <br /> <br />A. Existing Joint Powers Agreement with Ramsey County <br />B. Proposed Joint Powers Agreement with Ramsey County <br /> <br />City of Arden Hills <br />City Council Meeting for June 8, 2009 <br /> <br />\ \Ahdocs 1 \ah \AHdata\Planning\Recycling & Garbage \2009 \060809 - CC Report - Ramsey County JP A for Recycling Fee. doc <br />Page 2 of2 <br />