HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-10-27 WS & Council Meeting Packet
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION & COUNCIL MEETING
AGENDA
Wednesday, October 27, 2021
5:00/6:30 p.m.
MEETING IS IN PERSON
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
LIVE-STREAM: https://northmetrotv.com/centerville-stream/
WORK SESSION (5:00 PM)
I. CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
II. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION
1. American Rescue Plan Funding
2. Downtown Redevelopment Strategies
3. Broadband Grants
4. Old Mill Court Backyard Drainage Issues
III. ADJOURNMENT
COUNCIL MEETING (6:30 PM)
I. CALL TO ORDER
1. Roll Call
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
IV. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
1. None
V. PUBLIC HEARING
1. None
VI. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. July 28, 2021 City Council Work Session, Meeting & Closed Executive Session
Minutes
VII. CONSENT AGENDA
1. City of Centerville Claims through October 27, 2021 (Check #34640-34673),
(1776-1781E) & Voided Check #34638
2.Centennial Lake Police Department Claims through October 21, 2021 (Check
#14042-14052, 14055-14059), Payroll Check #14053-14054 & (2021055-2021056E)
3.Centennial Fire District Claims through October 12, 2021 (Check #9184-9191,
E202105)
4.Endorsement of Metro CitiesÓ 2022 Legislative Policies & Appointing City
Administrator as a Voting Representative
5.Encroachment Agreement, 1784 Meadow Lane Î Fence
VIII. OLD BUSINESS
1.Sutton Transport
a.Site Plan
b. Conditional Use Permit
c. Final Plat
IX. NEW BUSINESS
1.The Shores Outlot A Tax Forfeiture/Anoka County Tax Forfeit 2021 Classification
Property For Sale
2.Wellhead Protection Joint Powers Agreement
X. COUNCIL/ADMINISTRATOR ANNOUNCEMENTS
1.Administrator/Engineer Report
2.Council Reports
a.Lakso
Anoka County Fire Protection Council
Parks & Recreation
b. Koski
Fire Steering Committee
Planning & Zoning Commission
c. King
Economic Development Authority
d. Mosher
Economic Development Authority
Police Governing Board
e. Love
North Metro Telecommunications Commission
Police Governing Board
Fire Steering Committee
Other Mayoral Reports
XI. ADJOURNMENT
INFORMATIONAL MATERIAL
Low Level PFAS Detection
Wellhead Protection Grant
REMINDERS
All meetings take place at 6:30 p.m. unless otherwise noted
Ø Economic Development Authority Î Wednesday, November 17, 2021
Ø City Council Meeting Î Wednesday, November 10, 2021
Ø Parks & Recreation Committee Î Wednesday, November 3, 2021
Ø Planning & Zoning Commission Î Tuesday, November 2, 2021
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: Requested Council Meeting Date:
October 27, 2021
Finance
WS 1
TITLE OF ISSUE:
American Rescue Plan Funding
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
See attached memo from the Finance Director.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
Discussion only.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
_____
_____
Other (specify) ____________
_____ _____
_____
_____
_______________________________________________________________
_____ _____Ki
_____ ____________________________________________________________________
Administration Department Use:
Refer to: _________________________________
Consent
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Regular
Other: ___________________________________
Memorandum
Date: October 27, 2021
To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members
Through:Mark R. Statz, City Administrator/City Engineer
From: Bruce DeJong, Finance Director
Item: American Recovery Plan Funding Options
Staff is looking forward to discussing uses of the American Recovery Plan (ARP)
funding that has been granted to Centerville. We will review the potential uses of that
money.
We received a grant of $423,479.72 which will be divided into two payments of
$211,739.86. The first was received in July and the remainder is supposed to be
distributed in July, 2022. We may potentially receive additional money from unclaimed
proceeds allocated to other Minnesota jurisdictions.
There are two ways to spend the funding. The first is on categories specifically identified
by the federal government in the legislation. Those categories include:
Public Health and Economic Impacts
o Medical Care, PPE, Testing, and Isolation/Quarantine
o Assistance to Low Income Households, Small Businesses, and Non-Profits
Premium Pay for Essential Workers
Infrastructure
o Water, Sewer and Stormwater
We already have direct expenditures from the above categories. They total $21,899.64.
PPE/Cleaning Supplies $ 485.27
Diverted Staff Time City $ 845.18
Alexandra House Contributions $ 1,883.00
Zoom $ 104.93
Water, Sewer, and Stormwater projects
o Catch Basin Repairs $15,815.00
EDA Programs
o Blue Logo Sign $ 4,649.26
Other possible uses include:
Website Updates
Water, Sewer, and Stormwater projects
o Pond dredging and backyard drainage issues
o Other programs not yet contemplated
o Connection Fee Discounts (Water; commercial)
EDA Programs
o CenterStage
o Other programs not yet contemplated
The second way is to determine if the city experienced a revenue loss according to a
formula. This method assumes that anything less than a 4.1% increase in revenues is a
loss for purposes of this calculation.
I have used a spreadsheet created by the Government Finance Officers Association to
perform our revenue loss calculation. The results show a loss of $351,759 for 2020.
I have included the relevant pages from the spreadsheet and our annual financial report in
the attachments.
The loss of $351,759 exceeds our allocation for 2021. That means that all of our funding
$211,739.86 in current year funding may be used to provide general governmental
services. Government services can include, but are not limited to, maintenance or pay-go
funded building of infrastructure, including roads; modernization of cybersecurity,
including hardware, software, and protection of critical infrastructure; health services;
environmental remediation; school or educational services; and the provision of police,
fire, and other public safety services.
While this does represent a significant financial benefit to the city, it is important to note
that one of the foundational ideas for sustainable finance is that one-time revenues should
be used to fund one-time expenditures. We want to be careful as a staff that our
recommendations don’t come with significant expenditure commitments after the initial
funding source is depleted.
The guidance specifically prohibits using ARP funding to pay principal or interest on
existing debt because that use does not provide current government services.
We are able to carry over the additional revenue loss of $140,019.14 to apply against our
2022 allocation. We also get another look at revenue loss from 2020 compared to 2021
for the remaining $71,720.72 of our 2022 allocation. We only increased our tax levy by
0.87% for 2021, so we will likely have revenue well under the 4.1% increase assumed by
the formula, which leads to another revenue loss determination.
It is important to note that this program can extend for a long time frame. We are
obligated to have all the funds committed by December 31, 2024 and expended by
December 31, 2026.
Since we have the revenue loss we may also be able to fund some of the following
projects.
Diverted Staff Time Police
Diverted Staff Time Fire
NMTV Request for Funds
Streets and City Hall Parking Lot
Acorn Park parking improvements $21,444.10
Technology Improvements
Lost Revenues
o Liquor and Tobacco License discounts
o Late fees on Utility Bills
New Utility Billing and Financial Software
Geographic Information Systems Software
SCADA Software
City Council and staff may come up with other qualifying projects. It will be important
for us to document how each project relates to coronavirus pandemic relief. Any
individual project or use of fundsshould be specifically authorized by the City Council to
remove any ambiguity regarding applicability of the funding.
ARPARevenueReplacementCalculator
BackgroundInformation
Notes:
1)FiscalYearEnd December
BaseYearRevenuePeriod 12/31/2019 FYusedforbaseyearcalculation
2)CalculationDate 12/31/2020
NumberofMonths 12 MonthsbetweenBaseYearandCalculationDate
EstimateRevenue
3)BaseYearRevenue$4,658,052UseWorksheettoCalculate
4)GrowthRate 4.1%UseWorksheettoCalculate
CounterfactualRevenue$4,849,032EstimatedRevenueWithoutPandemic
5)ActualRevenue$4,497,273UseWorksheettoCalculate
ReductioninRevenue CźƭĭğƌĻğƩ9ƓķĻķЊЋΉЌЊΉЋЉЋЉ
RevenueReduction$351,759
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: Requested Council Meeting Date:
October 27, 2021
Administration/Planning/EDA
WS 2
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Downtown Redevelopment Strategies
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
The city administrator will provide an update on current downtown redevelopment opportunities and discuss
strategies.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
Discussion only.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
_____
_____
Other (specify) ____________
_____ _____
_____
_____
_______________________________________________________________
_____ _____Ki
_____ ____________________________________________________________________
Administration Department Use:
Refer to: _________________________________
Consent
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Regular
Other: ___________________________________
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: Requested Council Meeting Date:
October 27, 2021
Administration/EDA
WS 3
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Broadband Grants
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
See attached background information on Broadband Grants through Anoka County. A small area of our city
appears to be eligible for this funding. Staff is seeking direction on whether or not to further pursue a project
and grant application.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
Discussion only.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
_____
_____
Other (specify) ____________
_____ _____
_____
_____
_______________________________________________________________
_____ _____Ki
_____ ____________________________________________________________________
Administration Department Use:
Refer to: _________________________________
Consent
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Regular
Other: ___________________________________
Mark Statz
From:Samantha Markman <Samantha.Markman@co.anoka.mn.us>
Sent:Tuesday, October 12, 2021 4:58 PM
To:'achirpich@columbiaheightsmn.gov'; Andrea Worcester; 'bill.petracek@cityoflexingtonmn.org';
Daniel Buchholtz; 'dborglund@ci.anoka.mn.us'; 'dwebster@ci.ham-lake.mn.us'; Elizabeth x. Mursko;
'ethorvig@ci.blaine.mn.us'; 'info@bethelmn.govoffice2.com'; 'j.janish@andovermn.gov'; Jack Davis;
'jeffreympilon@gmail.com'; 'kthunstrom@stfrancismn.org'; 'lstreich@nowthenmn.net';
'lwickham@ci.oak-grove.mn.us'; Mark Statz; 'mbrown@coonrapidsmn.gov';
'michael.grochala@ci.lino-lakes.mn.us'; 'pam.olson@linwoodtownship.org'; Patrick Antonen;
'paul.bolin@fridleymn.gov'; 'rnelsen@hilltop.govoffice.com'; 'Ruth Tucker'; 'Sandy Lathrop Linwood ';
'scott.hickok@fridleymn.gov'; 'ssullivan@cityoframsey.com'; 'stephanie.hanson@ci.east-bethel.mn.us'
Cc:Rhonda Sivarajah; Karen Skepper
Subject:County Broadband Matching Funds - Now Available!
Attachments:Final -Broadband grant application (9.29.21).docx; 2021_10_11 FAQs - Broadband Grant
Program.docx
Caution:Thisemailoriginatedoutsideourorganization;pleaseusecaution.
GoodeveningΑ
AtƷƚķğǤƭAnokaCountyBoardofCommissionersmeeting,theBoardvotedtorollouttheattachedApplicationand
FrequentlyAskedQuestionsrelatedtotheBroadbandFundingallocation.InMay2021,theCountyBoardallocated
$3.15MinAmericanRescuePlandollarstosupportlocalbroadbandprojects.Sincethattime,therehavebeenafew
clarificationsandopportunitiesexpandedtoeligiblecommunities,pleaseseedetailsbelow.
Communitiescanapplyforamaximumof$150,000perprojectin1:1matchingfunds.
o ThecitiesmatchcancomefromlocalallocationsofARPAfunds.
Communitiesthatdonothaveaneedforbroadbandfundingmaypassaresolutionthattheir$150,000
appropriationbeaddedbackintotheƦƩƚŭƩğƒƭbudgetforadditionalprojectswheresupportisneeded.
o Anyexcessdollarsthatarereturnedviaresolutionwillbeeligibleforsecondaryprojectsupto$150,000
matchingfundsonafirstcome/firstservebasis.
Allprojects(includinganyusingtheadditionalfunds)willstillneedtobeinfullcompliancewithTreasury
guidanceandrequirements.
Ifyouhavequestionsabouttheapplicationorwanttolearnmoreaboutforegoingyourfundstosupporttheprojects
acrosstheCounty,pleasefeelfreetoreachouttomyselfand/orKarenSkepper,ǞĻķbehappytoassist.Asample
resolutionisavailable,shouldyoubeinterested.Pleasecontactustolearnmore!
ThanksforallthegreatworkyoudoeachandeverydaytosupportthegreatcommunitiesofAnokaCounty!Weare
hopefulthesematchingdollarsarebeneficialtoadvancingthebroadbandconnectivityacrosstheCounty.
Haveagreatevening,
Samantha
SamanthaMarkman|EconomicDevelopmentDirector
21003rdAvenue,Suite700|Anoka,MN55303
(o)763.324.4609|(c)612.358.8925
1
www.anokacountysuccess.org
NOTICE:Unlessrestrictedbylaw,emailcorrespondencetoandfromAnokaCountygovernmentofficesmaybepublic
datasubjecttotheMinnesotaDataPracticesActand/ormaybedisclosedtothirdparties.
2
Broadband
for
Areas
Opportunities
Grant
Un/Underserved
of
MapPotential
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: Requested Council Meeting Date:
October 27, 2021
Engineering/Public Works
WS 4
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Old Mill Court Backyard Drainage Issues
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
A group of residents wishes to bring to the City Council's attention a backyard drainage issue in their new
development. City staff has reviewed the situation and is pursuing a survey of the back yards and televising of
the draintile. However, it is staff's opinion that the survey and televising will not identify significant problems
and that the primary issue is related to the draintile being "capped" by a layer of clay, black dirt and sod. Staff
believes a simple exposure of the draintile (approximately 18" deep) and backfill with pea rock will solve a
majority of the issues.
Staff believes the issues here are a matter between the respective builders and homeowners.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
Discussion only.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
_____
_____
Other (specify) ____________
_____ _____
_____
_____
_______________________________________________________________
_____ _____Ki
_____ ____________________________________________________________________
Administration Department Use:
Refer to: _________________________________
Consent
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Regular
Other: ___________________________________
Mark Statz
From:David Kubat <dkubat@zimmigration.com>
Sent:Monday, October 11, 2021 1:39 PM
To:Mark Statz
Cc:Jessica Kubat; tony.tonkin@epsilon.com; amandatonkin@yahoo.com; tomdukatz@gmail.com;
katiedukatz@gmail.com; Johnson, Brandon (Minneapolis)
Subject:Letter to the Council regarding the drainage on North Old Mill Estates
Attachments:Centerville Letter.docx
Caution:Thisemailoriginatedoutsideourorganization;pleaseusecaution.
GoodAfternoonMark,
FirstIwanttothankyouforcomingouttoobservetheissuesfirsthandattheendofSeptember.AlthoughǞĻķhave
obviouslypreferredtobeinthisplaceatthebeginningoftheconstructionseasonthantheend,itsstillgoodtohave
somemovementtowardsacomprehensivefix.PriortoyoursitevisitwithBrandonandWadena,theneighborsaffected
bythiswaterissuepreparedaletterrequestingactionfromthecouncil.Thatsitevisitandthefollowupsdidaddressthe
issueofapotentialblockage,andwemadesomeagreementsonnextsteps,sowedecidedtorevisethelettertoreflect
thataction.Attachediswhatremains.Lķliketohavethisinfrontofcounselatthenextmeeting(ifpossible.)Thegoalis
tovalidatethecourseofactionthatwepreviouslyagreedandtoprovidecontextandinformationtothecounselinthe
eventthatweneedtorequestsomesortofredressfromthecitytoorderadditionalcorrectionsthatcrossproperty
lines.Iknowthatthecouncilisbusy,andthelinebetweenitemsthatcanbehandledwithstaffandthosethatrequire
councilactionarenotalwaysclear,butwethinkthatgiventhelatehourhereforthisseasonandthefactthatthisissue,
nomatterhowitiscorrected,isalmostcertaintoreoccurastheremainderofOldmillestatesgetscompleted,itis
worthyofbringingtotheirattention.
AlsoIwantedtofollowuponthetwoitemsthatwedidagreetohandle.
1. PipeTesting:ThecitywillhaveWadenarunthecamerathroughthepipeverifyingtheplacement,andwhether
ithasbeenbowedinanyplace.Notethattheplacementissueisimportantbecauseafterthemeetingthe
5ǒƉğƷǩƭdugatesttrenchtoseeiftheycouldgetthewaterfromtheswaletodrain(itdid),butalsorevealed
thatthebasinoftheirswaleislocatedseveralinchesfromthepipe.Alsothetopoftherocksockaroundthe
pipeismorethan
16inchesfromthesurfaceofthelawns,andaboveisacompactlayerofseveralinchesofclay.
2. Survey:Thecitywillorderasurveyoftheswaleasconstructedtodeterminethecorrectionsrequiredtobring
thepropertiesintoconformitywiththeplan.Leavingasideallofthediscussionabouthowwegottowherewe
are,inordertomoveforwardandcorrecttheissues,weneedacomprehensivelookatwhatthereistodayat
thismoment.
Wewerehopingtohavetheseitemscompleteinthenearfuturebecausethesnowisonthewayandalthoughitislikely
fartolatetogetanyoneouttocorrecttheseissuesinthefall.TheprimetimeforgettingonthebooksforSpringnext
yearisnow.ThefirstvideosoftheproblemsintheswalethatIshowedyouandBrandoncamefromtheearlypartof
springbutonlyhadrunofffromtwocompletedyardsatthattime.Nowthattheswale(suchasitis)iscompleted
across,wecanexpectthistobeworsenextyear.Lƒccingallthesignatoriesoftheletterforvisibility.OfcourseLƒ
happytoaddressanyconcernsthatyouorcitystaffhavewiththisissue.Iwillalsomakemyselfavailabletothecouncil
forquestionsifdesired.
Thanks,
David
1
2
DATE
TotheCityofCentervilleCouncil:
WearethecollectivehomeownersoftheoccupiednorthlotsofOldMillestates.
TonyandAmandaTonkinΑ1821OldMillCourt
DavidandJessicaKubatΑ1833OldMillCourt
TomandKatieDukatz1841OldMillCourt
Wearewritinginresponsetoanongoingandpersistentwatermanagementissuealongthedrainage
easementtothenorthofourpropertywhichhaspersistedfortheentiretimeofourresidence.Multiple
lotsaresaturatedandtherearefrequentstandingpoolsofwater.Despitefrequentrequeststothe
developer,respectivebuilders,andcitystaff,theproblemhasbeenyetunaddressedandthereisno
timeframethathasbeenprovidedbyanypartyastowhenaplanofactiontocorrecttheissuewillbe
developed,muchlessimplemented.
IdentifiedIssues:
1. Therearesubstantialgradedifferencesbetweenthelotsandalongtheswaleresultingin
poolingofwaterandpersistentstandingwater,aswellasalargeareaoflandthatneverdries
despiteoneofthedriestsummersonrecord.Thecityrequiredasbuiltsurveysforsomeofthe
lots(althoughnotothers);however,thosesurveyswerecompletedpriortotheinstallationof
thetopsoilandsod,andthereforetheconditionstodaydemonstrateasignificantvariancefrom
theplan.
2. Thedraintilepipe,thoughrecentlyverifiedtocarrywater,isburieddeepbelowcompactedclay
soilandisthereforeprovencompletelyinsufficient,asconstructed,toconductthewater
managementplanforthedevelopment.Cameraworktoverifytheconditionofthepipehas
beendelayedformonthsduetoadisputebetweenthedeveloperandthedraintileinstaller.
3. Theseconditionshavebeeninplacesincethefirstresidentsmovedinmorethanayearagoand
therehasbeenlittletonoactiontoremedythesituationtakenbythedeveloper,despitethe
persistentrequestsofcitystaffattheurgingoftheresidents.Thereisatthispointnotimeline
fortheidentificationandremediationoftheseissuesdeliveredbythedevelopertothe
th
homeowners,despitetherecentbreechoftheSeptember7,2021finaldeadlinetocomplete
theoutstandingitems,whichthemselveswerealreadysubstantiallyoverdue.Whilesome
progresshasbeenmadeonafewitemshereandthere,itisclearthatthemerethreatofcity
actionsinthefaceofnoncomplianceisinsufficientmotivationtoaddresstheseissues.
Requests:Werequestthecitycouncildirectstafftotakeactioninthefollowingways:
ItemsagreedtoonSeptember30,2021:
1. Surveyofconditionofthedrainageswalerunningalongalllotsonthenorthofoldmillestates
andidentifyanycurrentlyexistingdiscrepanciesfromthegradeasplanned.
2. Testtheentiredraintileforcorrectpositionintheswale,aswellasanybowinginthelineitself.
Assessthedepthofthepipebelowthesoilandcompareittotheplantodetermineiffurther
correctionisrequired.
Additionallyrequesteditemstobeidentifiedbasedonthetesteditemsabove
1. Contractwithacompanytocorrectthemultiplegradeissuesalongtheswaleandinsidethe
ĭźƷǤƭdrainageeasement.
2. Useexistingcitycontractsaswellasanyotherleveragethecityretainsoverthepartieswho
contributedtothecurrentproblemstorecoupallfundsnecessarytoaccomplishtheabove.
3. Takeactionstokeepthehomeownersinformedoftheprogressoftheseissuesandother
remainingpunchlistitemsatOldMillEstates.Thereisessentiallyzerocommunicationfromthe
developertothemorethan20residentswhonowliveinastilluncompleteddevelopmentwith
patchworksidewalks,mailboxesthatexistonsawmilltrusses,andwhatisineffect,awetland
acrossasoddedbackyard.
Timeline/Background:
August2020:Firstresidentsmoveinto1833OldMillcourt.Thewaterissueswereobviousimmediately
andcontactwasmadewiththecityandthebuilder.Noactionwastakenatthattime.
March2021:Withthesnowmeltthehomeownersof1833and1821noticedthattherewasaserious
drainageissueacrossthetwolots,theonlytwotohavebeencompletedatthattime.Therewasnearly
6inchesofwaterintheswaleanditwasapparentthatallofthedrainagewassurfacerunoff,despite
theoriginalplanbeingthatthemajorityofthewatermanagementwouldbeaccomplishedbythe
draintile,therebypermittinga1%gradeinsteadofa3%gradewhichwouldhavebeenmorecommon.
May2021:Thehomeownersbringthecontinuedwaterissuestotheattentionofcitystaffatanin
personmeeting.TheyreferthehomeownerstoBrandonJohnsonatStantecwhoreceivestheevidence
ofissueandcommitstoworkontheissuewiththedeveloper.Theyexpresstheintenttotestthedrain
tilesystemwithWeidemaConstructionatsomepointinthesummer.
JuneJuly2021:Afterahomeowneremailtothedeveloperccingallaffectedparties,ToddChristensen
sendswhatistodatehisonlycommunicationtotheresidentsonthewaterissuesonthenorthsideof
hisdevelopment.Inhisemailhestatesthatthegradeiscorrectbutacknowledgesthatthedraintile
maybepluggedordamaged.Brandonremainsincontactwiththehomeownersastestingthedraintile
isscheduledandrescheduledmultipletimes.InanemailinJune2021,Brandonalsoindicatesthathe
hasnoticedthegradeissuesasreportedbythehomeowners.Hesaystheseitemshavebeenaddedto
theĭźƷǤƭpunchlist.AlthoughBrandonhasbeenresponsiveandisclearlyattemptingtocorrectthese
issues,heacknowledgesinaJulyemailthattheonlytoolsathisdisposaltoforcecomplianceareto
retaindeveloperfundsuntiltheissuesarecompleteandtoremindhimofhiscommitments.
st
July26,2021:ThecityğķƒźƓźƭƷƩğƷƚƩƭreportstatesthatafinaldeadlineofSeptember1hasbeenset
forfinalcompletionofthedeveloperspunchlistandstatingthatanyremainingworkwillbeundertaken
bythecityusingtheķĻǝĻƌƚƦĻƩƭletterofcredit.Thehomeownersseekclarificationthatthisdeadline
alsoincludesfixingtheitemsalreadyinstalledwhicharenonfunctionallikethedrainageissues.Thisis
verifiedbycitystafftobetheplan.
August2021:Anextensionofthedraintilepipewasplacedonthefarwestendextendingintothe
wetland,however,therehasstillnotyetbeenafullscopeofthedraintilesystem,norhasanyone
undertakenasystematicexaminationofthegradeissuesasacknowledgedbytheĭźƷǤƭrepresentative
inJuly,anddeniedbythedeveloper.
September26,2021:Ahomeownerhiredirrigationcontractorinvestigatedapotentialirrigationleakon
theeastsideofthepropertyof1821.Approximately8inchesbelowthesurface,a4inchpvcpipewas
foundwiththeirrigationlinecutthroughit,fillingwithwater.Theirrigationsystemandexteriorwater
wascutoffandconfirmedtheirrigationlinewasnotthesourceofthewater.Thispiperunsparallelto
theplanneddraintilelineandisapproximately30feetsouth.
September27,2021:TheĭźƷǤƭStantecrepresentativeinspectedthenewfoundpipeandwasnotable
todeterminewhatpipewasfromlookingatit.
September28,2021:Anindependentcontractorwashiredbythehomeownerstoassessthedraintile
withafiberopticcamera.(workthatwassupposedtohavebeencompletebyMemorialday).Acamera
wasplacedattheaccesspointattheaddressof1833,itshowedthedraintilepipewascleanandhadno
waterinthedrainforapproximately150ftwestoftheproperty(whichwasnearlyattheextension.)
Waterfromhosewasaddedtodraintiletoseeifblockagewasallowcameratopass,itwasnot
successfulandwaterdidnotcomeoutoftheendofdraintile.Thecamerawasinsertedintheoutflow,
whichwascompletelyblockedwithdirtanddebris.
September30,2021:Attherequestofthehomeowners,thecityadministratormetonthelotto
observetheissuesdiscoveredbythehomeowners,andreceivetheevidencethatwasobtainedbythe
contractorhiredbythehomeownerstocompletethetestingthathadstillnotbeencompletedbythe
developer.Atthismeetingitwasdiscoveredthatthedraintilepipedidallowwatertodrain,despite
sedimentbuildupintheline.Howeverthepositionofthepipealongtheswalecouldnotyetbeverified.
Thecitycommittedtohavingtheentirelinescopedbycamerawithpositionsanddepths.Thecity
furthercommittedtohavingtheswalesurveyedinitscurrentasbuiltconditiontocompareitagainst
thedrainplanandassesswhichpartiesalongtheswalemayneedregradingtocorrectthedrain
system.
October310,2021:Twohomeownersattheirowndeviceselectedtotestthedrainagecapabilityofthe
pipebydiggingthroughthewaterloggedswaleontheirlotsanddidfindasubstantialbarrierofcompact
clayabovethedraintilelinewhichwasnearlyЊБͼunderground.Thisdidallowthenfortheareatodrain
indicatingthatanysolutiontothisissuewilllikelyrequiretheremovalofthisclaycapandreplacement
withotherpermeablematerials.ThisissueshouldbenotedforfutureyardinstallationsonOldMill
Estatesbecauseifthedepthofthedraintileisconsistent,thisproblemwillreoccurelsewhere.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
COUNCIL WORK SESSION, CITY COUNCIL MEETING & CLOSED EXECUTIVE
SESSION
JULY 28, 2021
6:30 p.m.
Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, the City of Centerville held a Council Work Session, City
Council meeting and Closed Executive Session on July 28, 2021
COUNCIL WORK SESSION
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor D. Love called the special meeting to order at 5:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL*
Not Approved
PRESENT: Mayor D. Love
Council Member Russ Koski (arrived at 5:04 p.m.)
Council Member Darrin Mosher
Council Member Steve King
Council Member Michelle Lakso
ABSENT: None.
STAFF: City Administrator Mark Statz
Finance Director Bruce DeJong
II. AGENDA ITEMS
1. RCWD Erosion Control Inspection Pilot Program
Administrator Statz reviewed the Joint Powers Agreement for the City of Centerville & Rice Creek
Watershed District (RCWD) Î Coordinating Site Erosion & Sediment Control Programs and MS4
Compliance for Minimum Control Measure 4 as presented.
He stated that there has been duplication by city consultants and RCWD staff completing
inspections relating to silt fencing, etc. within the requirements of the Minimum Control Measures
(MCMs) within the CityÓs MS4 permit. He stated that this would be a pilot program allowing for
duplication to discontinue, the City reducing the costs passed along to developers and increase
revenues to RCWD. He stated that the City generally contracts consultants to perform inspections
at a rate of approximately $130/hour and RCWD would charge the city $55/hour. He felt that it
was a win-win situation for the city and RCWD.
He stated that no action was needed, it was a discussion item only to ascertain Council input.
Brief discussion was had by Council.
2. City Hall Staffing
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
Administrator Statz stated that over the recent years, the city has had three (3) part-time
Receptionists. He stated that it has been challenging to obtain/retain employees in this position
due to work-flow, duties, knowledge, etc. He stated that he felt that hiring a full-time staff member
at a proposed budget level of $70,000 plus benefits would obtain an employee with a skill-set that
may relieve some duties of current staff and provide the city with new assets (social media, web
site, etc.) skills.
He stated that no action was needed, it was a discussion item only to ascertain Council input and
to make Council aware that the position was included in the 2022 budget for further discussion.
He stated that he would submit a Job Description for further discussion at CouncilÓs next meeting.
Discussion ensued regarding planning background, Parks & Recreation experience, accounting
experience; recruitment, reporting, social media and web content/site, etc.
3. 2022 General Fund Budget
Finance Director DeJong stated that he noted a typographical error of approximately $9,000 for
the line item Elections. He stated that the new full-time position has been added and he explained
the offsetting costs for the position (Water/Sewer, $20,000 contingency from the CouncilÓs budget,
$25,000 costs of a part-time position, etc.) He stated that he felt that the general fund budget
balance would increase $30,000. He addressed that revenue from fines/forfeitures have trended
down with the revenue for this item being decreased $2,000. Reviewed additional increases with
Council (assessing, police contract, fire contract, proper allocation of Workers Compensation for
the Public Works Department, engineering fees for Streets, transfer to EDA and Equipment
Replacement. He also stated that the overall effect of these changes increased the General Fund
levy of $151,305. He informed Council that the levy is offset by the decrease in debt service levy
of $49,391 with a net increase of $101,914 or a 3.7% increase in the overall levy. He stated that
information from Anoka County regarding property value increases have not been received.
Discussion ensued regarding salary increases, CIP, American Rescue Plan Funding, replacement
vehicles, ability to purchase equipment, maintenance of ponds/stormwater fund, having the ability
to slowly increase the levy with gradual increases rather than a 12% increase due to cashflow,
1.5% growth from new construction, presentation of Centennial Lakes Police Budget shortly with
a 8-10% increase due to Workers Compensation increases due to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD), public safety being the CityÓs largest expenditure, etc. Council Member Lakso requested
a yearly check-list for Capital Improvement Projects and budgeting.
4. DNR Watering Restrictions
Administrator Statz stated that the DNR has issued a Ðsevere droughtÑ warning letter to all water
suppliers which requests that the City work to reduce water usage. He explained that this is stage
one with an Ðextreme droughtÑ being next and then Ðexceptional droughtÑ. He stated that the DNR
provides weekly updates every Thursday. He also explained that May Î September the City
invokes a water restriction between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. He stated that the CityÓs
program follows the requirements of the DNR. He stated that if the DNR imposed higher warnings
the City may need to consider more restrictive/punitive enforcement for violations.
Page 2 of 11
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
Mayor Love closed the Council Work Session at 6:29 p.m. allowing for a five (5) minute break
prior to the regularly scheduled Council meeting.
COUNCIL MEETING
I. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor D. Love called the special meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.
ROLL CALL
PRESENT: Mayor D. Love
Council Member Russ Koski
Council Member Darrin Mosher
Council Member Steve King
Council Member Michelle Lakso
ABSENT: None.
STAFF: City Administrator Mark Statz
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
III. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Mayor Love provided an opportunity for others to add or delete any items.
Administrator Statz suggested moving Item #VIII. Recess to Closed Executive Session and the
Closed Executive Session before Item #XIII. Adjournment.
Motion by Council Member Koski, seconded by Council Member King, to Approve the
Agenda as Amended. All in favor. Motion carried.
IV. APPOINTMENTS/PRESENTATIONS/COMMENTS
1. None.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. None.
VI. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES
1. April 14, 2021 City Council Meeting Minutes
Mayor Love provided an opportunity for Council to make modifications to the minutes if desired.
Page 3 of 11
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
Motion by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Mosher to Approve the
April 14, 2021 City Council Meeting Minutes as Presented. All in favor. Motion carried.
2. April 28, 2021 City Council Work Session & City Council Meeting Minutes
Mayor Love provided an opportunity for Council to make modifications to the minutes if desired.
Motion by Council Member Lakso, seconded by Council Member Koski to Approve the
April 28, 2021 City Council Work Session & City Council Meeting Minutes as Presented.
All in favor. Motion carried.
3. May 4, 2021 City Council Special Council Meeting
Mayor Love provided an opportunity for Council to make modifications to the minutes if desired.
Motion by Council Member Lakso, seconded by Council Member Mosher to Approve the
May 4, 2021 City Council Special Council Meeting Minutes as Presented. All in favor.
Motion carried.
VII. CONSENT AGENDA
1. City of Centerville Claims through July 28, 2021 (Check #33913-33944) &
(1737-1742E)
2. Centennial Lake Police Department Claims through July 22, 2021 (Check
#13916-13938), Payroll (Check #13914-13915) & (2021035-2021038E)
3. Centennial Fire District Claims through July 13, 2021 (Check #9114-9135)
4. Encroachment Agreement, 7245 Clear Ridge Î (Fence)
5. Catch Basin Repairs
6. Lawn Mowing Service
7. Transfer of Funds to EDA
8. Request for Payment #10 Î Downtown Street and Utility Improvements Î A-1
Contracting
Mayor Love provided an opportunity for the Council to add or remove any item(s) to/from the
consent agenda.
Mayor Love asked if Item #5 was a budgeted item and Council Member King pulled Item #6 for
discussion.
Motion by Council Member Koski, seconded by Council Member King, to Approve Consent
Agenda Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 & 8 as Presented. All in favor. Motion carried.
Council Member King that due to a family member working for the RJÓs Property Maintenance he
was unsure how to abstain from the vote if the motion contained all items.
Page 4 of 11
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
Motion by Council Member Lakso, seconded by Council Member Koski to Approve Consent
Agenda Items 6 as Presented. Council Member King Abstained. Motion carried.
**This items below were moved to Item #XII prior to Adjournment of the Regular City Council
Meeting.
VIII. RECESS TO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
This portion of the meeting is closed pursuant to Minnesota State Statute Section 13D.05,
subdivision 3(c), and is permitted to determine the asking price for, and to develop or consider
offers or counteroffers for the sale of Block 7, Centerville
I. ROLL CALL
II. DISCUSSION
COUNCIL MEETING (Continued)
IX. RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING
X. OLD BUSINESS
1. Purchase Agreement Î Block 7 Î Centra Homes
Administrator Statz gave a brief history of development firms that have been interested in
developing the site, Requests for Proposals (six (6) developers and two (2) responses) and elements
the Planning & Zoning Commission and Council desired to see on the site, Downtown Master Plan
and the 2040 Comprehensive Plan elements. He stated that staff from Centra Homes and City staff
have been working diligently to derive an acceptable purchase agreement.
Administrator Statz reviewed the three (3) areas that remained to be acceptable by Centra Homes
and they are as follows: Two (2) Phased Project and Right of Reverter; Force Majeure Clause;
and HomeownerÓs HOA Cost Burden. He stated that he felt that there was miscommunication
regarding Item #1 and clarified per Ms. Carla DunhamÓs email dated July 22, 2021. Administrator
Statz also addressed the Right of Reverter which Centra Homes was favorable with along with a
Letter of Credit (LOC). He stated that this protects the City and themselves. He reported that the
Right of Reverter would remain in place until all upfront infrastructure improvements detailed in
the DeveloperÓs Agreement. Administrator Statz reported that Centra Homes also was favorable
with the Force Majeure Clause being capped at 24 months as recommended by Council. He stated
that there were concerns of the LOC for a period of 10 years associated with the HOA would
protect early purchasers from carrying cost of community maintenance, etc. if Centra Homes did
not have the ability to complete the project. He reported that Centra Homes counter-offered that
they would pre-fund the HOA for a period of 4 years ($15,000/year for four (4) years = $60,000.
This would cover snow removal from the private street and trail, lawn care, landscaping/irrigation
in the common area and include a reserve. Centra Homes desired for these costs to be equal to
Page 5 of 11
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
following the close of each unit, the HOA will refund Centra Homes $2,307.69 per unit ($60,000
= 26 units) until all units are sold. Administrator Statz stated that he felt that it was a good
agreement.
Mayor Love asked if the developer had any additional comments to make and Mr. David Pattberg
stated no.
Discussion ensued regarding a lot split, 26 lots and an outlot for the roadway which was the original
thought of Centra Homes and Mr. Pattberg believes this is part of the confusion of phasing;
extension of time of performance for 24 months; HOA and the $15,000/year as cost as a best guess,
previously failed HOAÓs, etc.; clarification on the way the buildings would be built; and Centra
Homes stated that they would not be able to finance the project if the City owned part of the project.
Administrator Statz stated that this eveningÓs direction would yield a final purchase agreement.
Mayor Love moved XI. New Business, Item #4 to present. He stated that he desired to move it
up on the Agenda as Chief Charlie Smith, Spring Lake Park/Blaine/Mounds View Fire Department
was in attendance.
IX. NEW BUSINESS
1. Contract for Fire Administration Services Î Spring Lake Park/Blaine/Mounds View
(SBM) Fire Department
Chief Smith introduced himself to the Council and thanked them for allowing SBM to provide
these services. He stated that the firefighters from Centennial have been fantastic to work with
through this transition period. He stated that SBM is a people centered organization and mission
centered. He stated that the officers of the Department but they exist to support the firefighters
and supply them with the tools needed to provide services to the public. He stated that there are
nine (9) chief officers that throughout the transition period. He explained that the Centennial
Department would remain the same but staffing, training and response times would be a priority.
Administrator Statz stated that the Fire Steering Committee has voted to accept the proposal and
enter into the contract presented, but desires to obtain both CouncilÓs (Circle Pines/Centerville)
approval as well. He stated that SBM will be the Chief and two (2) Full-Time firefighters will be
added with the positions being filled by August 16, 2021. He also stated that three (3) people will
be on duty during the day time and response times should improve. Administrator Statz stated that
all fire departments are experiencing the lack of day time firefighters and recruitment is extremely
difficult.
Mayor Love stated that two (2) members of Council sit on the Fire Steering Committee, himself
and Council Member Koski. He stated that they voted in favor of forwarding the contract to
Council for consideration. Mayor Love provided Council Member Koski with an opportunity to
speak on the item. Council Member Koski thanked the entire Steering Committee, Administrators,
Co-Chief Peil and stated that a large amount of time was put into the decision making process and
the agreement. He stated that this has taken over a year, the hiring of a consultant, a large amount
of research and consideration by all involved and the decision was not made lightly as this is public
Page 6 of 11
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
safety. He believed that staffing, communication and response times benefit all in the community.
He thanked Chief Smith for his efforts and leadership in making us comfortable with the transition.
He desired to caution Council on the proposed savings of $40,000 as it may not remain that way.
Mayor Love stated that there are seven (7) reason he felt that the contract was good for Centerville
and its citizen. He stated that there is a large amount of discussion about regional firefighting and
we are on the cutting edge with the agreement, we get to remain Centennial Fire, take advantage
of robust training with SBM, provides a different approach for operating the department than in
the past, we have an out clause, Chief SmithÓs leadership and the survey of firefighters who had
no objections to the contract.
Discussion ensued regarding the opportunity to enter into the agreement, ensuring that the contract
is fulfilling the needs and goals outlined, the 10% language for excessive
administrative/management costs, collaboration is unknown, opportunities for additional
discussion, unforeseen items, and resource heavy in the beginning.
Chief Smith stated that they are adding two (2) fire stations to their family of five (5) with this
contract. He stated that Centennial Fire is a fantastic organization and that SBM would be
providing leadership and making things better for the firefighters and the public.
Lengthy discussion ensued regarding SBMÓs structure, amount of full-time firefighters, cross-
trained City of Blaine staff, use technology, non-traditional ways of doing things, staffing at Circle
Pines and Centerville, M-Health (Advanced Life Support), amount of firefighters on a call (OSHA
standards 4) with stipulations, mutual aid and a 10 year contract with Blaine to expire in 2023 with
renewal options.
Mayor Love thanked Chief Smith for his attendance.
Chief Smith thanked Council for their support and stated that they would not let the City down.
Motion by Council Member Koski, seconded by Council Member Mosher to Approve the
Administrative Services Contract with Spring Lake Park/Blaine/Mounds View (SBM) Fire
District. All in favor. Motion carried.
2. Extension of Contract Î ABDO, Eick & Meyers
Administrator Statz stated that ABDO, Eick & Meyers has been delivering financial auditing
services for the City for numerous years with the existing three year contract expiring. He stated
that the contract would be an extension for an additional three (3) year period with modest
increases. He stated that the Finance Director solicited a bid for the extension. Administrator
Statz felt that the City has received good services with them in the past and recommends approval
of the contract extension. He stated that Council could solicit Requests for Proposals if desired.
Discussion ensued regarding Requests for Proposals for the future, professional services and
continued relationships are important, the length of time it has been since the last Request for
Proposals for these services, establishing a policy for length of time before Request for Proposals
Page 7 of 11
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
are taken with all professional service providers, put on record when contract ends the City will be
going out for RFPs.
Motion by Council Member Koski, seconded by Council Member Lakso to Approve the
Contract with ABDO, Eick & Meyers for Audit Services for Fiscal Years 2021, 2022 and
2023 as Presented.
Council Member Mosher asked whether the motion should include soliciting RFPs following the
2023 audit. Council Member Koski felt that it was not needed but should be considered before
granting another extension.
All in favor. Motion carried.
3. Preliminary Plat Î Peterson Shores
Administrator Statz stated that this is a simple lot split of one (1) larger parcel being split into two
(2) along the lake. He stated that the original preliminary plat contained property owned by the
St. Paul Regional Water. He explained that the plat has been revised, there is an easement on the
property and the intended home would not be in the easement and that there is one (1) driveway
but the County has stated that they would allow another. Administrator Statz stated that fees would
be due for SAC and WAC for the new lot and one (1) WAC for the existing home when removed
and rebuilt. He also stated that additional fees will be due such as stormwater fees and park
dedication fees. He stated that the P & Z Commission held its required hearing and is making the
recommendation to Council for approval.
Administrator Statz stated that the plat that is contained in the packet is not the revised plat
excluding St. Paul Regional WaterÓs property.
Motion by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Koski to Approve the
Preliminary Plat for Peterson Shores Contingent upon Addressing the Comments of all City
Staff & Departments. All in favor. Motion carried.
4. Preliminary Plat Î Rehbein Industrial Î Sutton Transportation
Administrator Statz stated that this plat is for a single 15 acre parcel with the dedication of right-
st
of-way for both 21 Avenue and Fairview Street. He stated that the plat is being completed to
accommodate the development of a 40,000 square foot warehousing/cross-dock facility for Sutton
st
Transport and due to the fact that Fairview Street will be completed to 21 Avenue. Administrator
Statz stated that this is an existing business that is moving from their current location. He stated
that they would have outside storage meeting the CityÓs code. He noted that they are meeting all
requirements of the code but that is not for consideration this evening. He stated that this is for
the Preliminary Plan, infrastructure and a Final Plat and DeveloperÓs Agreement will be in the
future. He also stated that the P & Z Commission held its required hearing and is making the
recommendation to Council for approval.
Page 8 of 11
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
st
Discussion ensued regarding outside storage as the building expanding, the extension of 21
Avenue to Cedar Street, strict outside storage regulations, building esthetics and Conditional Use
requirements.
Motion by Council Member Mosher, seconded by Council Member Koski to Approve the
Preliminary Plat for Rehbein Industrial, contingent upon addressing the Comments of all
City Staff & Department. All in favor. Motion carried.
5. RCWD Erosion Control Inspection Pilot Program
Administrator Statz stated that this was discussed at the Work Session earlier this evening, he
reported that RCWD has not approved the document yet but have fined tuned it and that is what is
before Council this evening.
Motion by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Koski to Approve the
RCWD Erosion Control Inspection Pilot Program.
Council Member Lakso stated that the motion recommended by Staff was to approve the Joint
Powers Agreement with the Rice Creek Watershed District for Coordination of Erosion and
Sediment Control Inspections.
Council Member King accepted the friendly amendment and rephrased the motion as follows:
Motion by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Koski to Approve the Joint
Powers Agreement with the Rice Creek Watershed District for Coordination of Erosion and
Sediment Control Inspections as presented. All in favor. Motion carried.
X. COUNCIL/ADMINISTRATOR ANNOUNCEMENTS
1. AdministratorÓs Report
Administrator Statz stated that his report was in the packet for review and he would accept
and questions. He also stated that the moratorium for evictions was going to end soon and
calling 211 will provide rental assistance. He stated that the festival, Music in the Park and
Main Street Market have really been wonderful events and he thanked the volunteers for
their hard work. He noted that he has been working with developers to finalize items and
their completion dates have come and gone. He stated that September 1 is the deadline if
items are not completed, the City will be drawing on Letters of Credit.
Mayor Love asked about the Brew Pub and where Administrator Statz suggested sites. He
stated that he emailed them and shared that with EDA. Administrator Statz stated that he
suggested 1695 and 1737 Main Street 5,000-8,000 sq. feet of building is desired.
Suggested an industrial building zoned Commercial and potential site of where the
apartment building was proposed.
Council Reports
Page 9 of 11
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
a. Lakso -
i. Anoka County Fire Protection Council Î Was unable to attend. She did ask how
it will look with Chief Smith representing us. Administrator Statz stated that Chief
Smith is a consultant and all will remain. Officer BJ Stephan and herself served in
the capacity of Incident Management. She stated that having a Security and Safety
Plan worked well and she will be sharing it with other communities.
ii. Parks and Recreation Committee Î Council Member Lakso reported that Heidi
Errickson-Grahek was appointed Chair of the Committee and Ms. Jessica Kubat
was appointed to the Committee.
b. Koski Î
i. Fire Steering Committee Î Council Member Koski that the meeting took place on
th
the 15 and the contract with SBM was approved.
ii. Planning & Zoning Commission Î Council Member Koski stated that the meeting
was moved due to Night to Unite.
c. King Î
i. Economic Development Authority Î Council Member King stated that they went
over the budget, discussion took place regarding 1737 Main Street and preparing
plans assisting with the sale of the property.
d. Mosher Î
i. Economic Development Authority Î Council Member Mosher stated that the
EDA discussed putting money towards ($10-15,000) for Mr. Mike Brass to develop
plans for a building which would saving time in attracting businesses for the 1737
Main Street.
ii. Police Governing Board Î No report was given.
e. Love Î Suggested that the proposed renderings should include our suggestion for exterior
aesthetics. He stated that the Main Street Market and Bald Eagle Ski Club took place and
he had an opportunity to attend and he was impressed with the turnout. He stated that he
attended Mr. Randy LauderbaughÓs retirement. He stated that he was unable to attend the
Fete des Lacs celebrations and it was wonderful seeing everyone out and about and
enjoying themselves. He thanked all involved in making this wonderful event happen. He
also thanked all supporters of his son and stated that well wishes and donates have been
much appreciated. He asked for additional prayers.
North Metro Telecommunications Commission Î No report was given.
Police Governing Board Î No report was given.
Fire Steering Committee Î No report was given.
Other Mayor Reports Î No report was given.
XI. RECESS TO CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
Page 10 of 11
City of Centerville
Council Work Session, City Council & Closed Exec. Meeting Minutes
July 28, 2021
Mayor Love recessed the regularly scheduled City Council meeting at 8:24 p.m. and read the
language allowing for the Closed Executive Session.
CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
This portion of the meeting is closed pursuant to Minnesota State Statute 13D.05, subdivision
3 (c), and is permitted to determine the asking price for and to develop or consider offers or
counteroffers for the sale of Block 7, Centerville.
I. ROLL CALL
Mayor Love, Council Members King, Koski, Lakso and Mosher along with Staff member
Administrator Statz were present.
II. DISCUSSION
III. ADJOURN TO REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Motion by Council Member Koski, seconded by Council Member Moser to Adjourn the
Closed Executive Session at 9:15 p.m. All in favor. Motion carried.
CITY COUNCIL
The regularly scheduled Council meeting reconvened at 9:16 p.m.
XII. ADJOURNMENT
Motion by Council Member King, seconded by Council Member Koski to Adjourn the
Regularly Scheduled Council Meeting of July 28, 2021 at 9:16 p.m. All in favor. Motion
carried.
Respectfully submitted by City Clerk, Teresa Bender
Page 11 of 11
10/20/21 10:42 AM
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
Page 1
Check Detail - October 27, 2021
Check
DateCheck #Vender NameCommentsAmount
110/15/2021001776EIRS/EFTPSFED W/H - PAY PERIOD 21$2,769.80
110/15/2021001776EIRS/EFTPSFICA/MED - PAY PERIOD 21$4,534.08
Check Nbr 001776 IRS/EFTPS$7,303.88
110/15/2021001777EMINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUESTATE W/H - PAY PERIOD 21$1,175.21
Check Nbr 001777 MINNESOTA DEPT OF REVENUE$1,175.21
110/18/2021001778EOPTUM BANK - H.S.A.H.S.A. W/H - PAY PERIOD 21$1,296.33
Check Nbr 001778 OPTUM BANK - H.S.A.$1,296.33
110/15/2021001779EPERAPERA W/H - PAY PERIOD 21$3,459.19
Check Nbr 001779 PERA$3,459.19
110/19/2021001780EPSNPSN CHARGES - UTILITIES - THRU 9-30-21$375.93
110/19/2021001780EPSNPSN CHARGES - UTILITIES - THRU 9-30-21$375.92
110/19/2021001780EPSNPERMITS & FEES - THRU 9-30-21$214.89
110/19/2021001780EPSNMISC. - SERV THRU 9-30-21$31.21
Check Nbr 001780 PSN$997.95
110/19/2021001781ETASCF.S.A - W.H - PAY PERIOD 20$114.58
Check Nbr 001781 TASC$114.58
110/20/2021034640 4IMPRINTBLANKETS FOR VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION$1,332.34
Check Nbr 034640 4IMPRINT$1,332.34
110/20/2021034641 AFLACOCT.2021 AFLAC$251.60
Check Nbr 034641 AFLAC$251.60
110/20/2021034642 AIRFRESH INDUSTRIES, INC.EXTRA PUMPING SERVICE - PORTABLE RESTROOMS- SERV TH$72.00
110/20/2021034642 AIRFRESH INDUSTRIES, INC.PORTABLE RESTROOMS - SERV THRU 10-18-21$672.00
Check Nbr 034642 AIRFRESH INDUSTRIES, INC.$744.00
110/20/2021034643 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS2337545.001 - 6889 PHEASANT LANE$46.00
110/20/2021034643 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS2334336.007 - 7245 CLEAR RIDGE$46.00
110/20/2021034643 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS2334724.007 - 1759 PARTRIDGE PLACE$46.00
Check Nbr 034643 ANOKA COUNTY PROPERTY RECORDS$138.00
110/20/2021034644 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURYNOV. 2021 BROADBAND$37.50
110/20/2021034644 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURYNOV. 2021 BROADBAND$37.50
110/20/2021034644 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURYNOV. 2021 BROADBAND$37.50
Check Nbr 034644 ANOKA COUNTY TREASURY$112.50
110/20/2021034645 BURTON, ROBERT1605 WIDGEON - OVER PD FINAL UT BILL$26.95
Check Nbr 034645 BURTON, ROBERT$26.95
110/20/2021034646 CENTENNIAL FIRE RELIEF ASSOC.STATE FIRE AID & SUPP AID$55,927.35
Check Nbr 034646 CENTENNIAL FIRE RELIEF ASSOC.$55,927.35
110/20/2021034647 CENTERPOINT ENERGY6970 LAMOTTE DR - SERV THRU 9-28-21$28.28
110/20/2021034647 CENTERPOINT ENERGY1880 MAIN ST - SERV THRU 9-28-21$114.75
110/20/2021034647 CENTERPOINT ENERGY2085 W CEDAR ST - SERV THRU 9-28-21$222.13
110/20/2021034647 CENTERPOINT ENERGY1785 PELTIER LAKE DR - SERV THRU 9-28-21$27.24
Check Nbr 034647 CENTERPOINT ENERGY$392.40
110/20/2021034648 CHEF HOT HANDSCATERING FOOD FOR P & R VOLUNTEER APPRECIATION DIN$1,000.00
Check Nbr 034648 CHEF HOT HANDS$1,000.00
110/20/2021034649 CITY OF CIRCLE PINESGEN. OBLG. CAPITAL NOTES, SERIES 2016A$7,596.16
Check Nbr 034649 CITY OF CIRCLE PINES$7,596.16
110/20/2021034650 CORE & MAINWATER METER PARTS$173.44
Check Nbr 034650 CORE & MAIN$173.44
110/20/2021034651 DEJONG, BRUCEREIMBURSE FOR DISPLAY PORT CABLE$16.12
Check Nbr 034651 DEJONG, BRUCE$16.12
110/20/2021034652 DELTA DENTALDENTAL INS - SERV THRU 11-30-21$406.55
Check Nbr 034652 DELTA DENTAL$406.55
10/20/21 10:42 AM
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
Page 2
Check Detail - October 27, 2021
Check
DateCheck #Vender NameCommentsAmount
110/20/2021034653 ELECTRICAL INSTALLERSREFUND C20-086 LESS 20% - RECEIPT DATED 11-16-20 CONF$152.00
110/20/2021034653 ELECTRICAL INSTALLERSREFUND C20-086 LESS 20% - RECEIPT DATED 11-16-20 CONF$1.00
Check Nbr 034653 ELECTRICAL INSTALLERS$153.00
110/20/2021034654 GENERAL REPAIR SERVICE7266 MOUND COURT - UNCLOG & CLEAN PUMP$457.75
Check Nbr 034654 GENERAL REPAIR SERVICE$457.75
110/20/2021034655 GRAYBARLUMEC POLES$1,128.00
110/20/2021034655 GRAYBARLUMEC POLES$2,504.94
Check Nbr 034655 GRAYBAR$3,632.94
110/20/2021034656 IIMCT. BENDER MEMBERSHIP DUES$175.00
Check Nbr 034656 IIMC$175.00
110/20/2021034657 IMAGE PRINTING & GRAPHICSVOLUNTEER APPRECIATION POSTCARD$108.80
110/20/2021034657 IMAGE PRINTING & GRAPHICSVOLUNTEER CERTIFICATE$44.50
Check Nbr 034657 IMAGE PRINTING & GRAPHICS$153.30
110/20/2021034658 INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS LLOFFICE SUPPIES$66.14
Check Nbr 034658 INNOVATIVE OFFICE SOLUTIONS LL$66.14
110/20/2021034659 INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCH INCSEPTEMBER 2021 WATER TESTING$52.50
Check Nbr 034659 INSTRUMENTAL RESEARCH INC$52.50
110/20/2021034660 LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCLONG TERM DISABILITY INS THRU 11-30-21$318.93
Check Nbr 034660 LINCOLN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANC$318.93
110/20/2021034661 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE, INC.REPAIRS TO SPINNER MOTOR - BLACK - 3 CUBIC INCH$503.17
Check Nbr 034661 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE, INC.$503.17
110/20/2021034662 MARCO, INC.STANDARD PAYMENT PER CONTRACT$202.42
Check Nbr 034662 MARCO, INC.$202.42
110/20/2021034663 MET. COUNCIL ENV. SERV. (SDS)WASTE WATER SERVICES FOR OCT. 2021$18,897.22
110/20/2021034663 MET. COUNCIL ENV. SERV. (SDS)WASTE WATER SERVICES FOR JUNE 2021$18,897.22
110/20/2021034663 MET. COUNCIL ENV. SERV. (SDS)WASTE WATER SERVICES SERV FOR SEPTEMBER 2020$19,836.43
Check Nbr 034663 MET. COUNCIL ENV. SERV. (SDS)$57,630.87
110/20/2021034664 MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOCMEMBERSHIP DUES THRU NOV. 2022$300.00
Check Nbr 034664 MINNESOTA RURAL WATER ASSOC$300.00
110/20/2021034665 MN PEIPHEALTH INSURANCE - THRU 11-30-21$2,956.52
Check Nbr 034665 MN PEIP$2,956.52
110/20/2021034666 MY HOLDING, INC. DBA FIRST IMPCITY HALL FOGGING - PPE/VIRUSES/BACTERIA/ETC$563.00
Check Nbr 034666 MY HOLDING, INC. DBA FIRST IMP$563.00
110/20/2021034667 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTIONDEF COMP - PAY PERIOD 22$1,083.33
Check Nbr 034667 NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION$1,083.33
110/20/2021034668 RECYCLE TECHNOLOGIESRECYCLING EVENT ON 9-11-2021$1,833.15
Check Nbr 034668 RECYCLE TECHNOLOGIES$1,833.15
110/20/2021034669 REPUBLIC SERVICES, INC.SEPT. 2021 GARBAGE SERVICES$16,973.97
110/20/2021034669 REPUBLIC SERVICES, INC.SEPT. 2021 RECYCLING SERVICES$4,572.76
Check Nbr 034669 REPUBLIC SERVICES, INC.$21,546.73
110/20/2021034670 SUN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANYLIFE INS - SERV FOR NOV. 2021$99.39
110/20/2021034670 SUN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANYSHORT TERM DIS - SERV FOR NOV. 2021$151.78
Check Nbr 034670 SUN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY$251.17
110/20/2021034671 TRU GREEN - CHEM LAWNLAWN CARE - PARKS$450.00
Check Nbr 034671 TRU GREEN - CHEM LAWN$450.00
110/20/2021034672 VERIZONCELL PHONE SERV THRU 10-09-21$49.38
110/20/2021034672 VERIZONCELL PHONE SERV THRU 10-09-21$49.38
110/20/2021034672 VERIZONCELL PHONE SERV THRU 10-09-21$49.38
110/20/2021034672 VERIZONCELL PHONE SERV THRU 10-09-21$59.64
110/20/2021034672 VERIZONTABLET SERV THRU 10-09-21$41.01
10/20/21 10:42 AM
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
Page 3
Check Detail - October 27, 2021
Check
DateCheck #Vender NameCommentsAmount
Check Nbr 034672 VERIZON$248.79
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY7285 MAIN ST - SERV THRU 10-03-21$53.62
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY1600 LAMOTTE DR - BALLFIELD LIGHTS - SERV THRU 10-02-2$192.21
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY1889 CENTER ST - SEWER LIFT - SERV THRU 10-05-21$28.22
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY7300 MILL RD - SEWER LIFT - SERV THRU 10-02-21$191.72
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY1600 LAMOTTE DR - WARMING HOUSE - SERV THRU 10-03-21$23.12
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY1875 FOX RUN - PUMP - SERV THRU 10-02-21$134.67
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGYSTREET LIGHTS - SERV THRU 10-04-21$2,213.33
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY1880 MAIN ST - SERV THRU 10-04-21$1,791.44
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY1880 MAIN ST - CITY HALL/FIRE STAT - SERV THRU 100-4-21$573.42
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY1745 MAIN ST - SERV THRU 10-03-21$19.91
110/20/2021034673 XCEL ENERGY1682 MAIN ST - SERV THRU 10-03-21$146.42
Check Nbr 034673 XCEL ENERGY$5,368.08
$180,411.34
CENTENNIAL LAKES POLICE DEPTCheck Register - POLICEPage: 1
Check Issue Dates: 10/15/2021 - 10/21/2021Oct 21, 2021 10:53AM
Report Criteria:
Report type: Summary
Check NumberCheck Issue DatePayeeAmount
1405510/21/2021AMAZON105.87
1405610/21/2021AXON ENTERPRISE, INC765.50
1405710/21/2021CONNEXUS ENERGY1,360.67
1405810/21/2021GEORGE'S INC35.00
1405910/21/2021IMAGE PRINTING & GRAPHICS, INC57.75
Grand Totals: 2,324.79
Payroll Check #14053-14054
M = Manual Check, V = Void Check
CENTENNIAL FIRE DISTRICTCheck Register - FIREPage: 1
Check Issue Dates: 10/13/2021 - 10/26/2021Oct 22, 2021 10:49AM
Report Criteria:
Report type: Summary
Check NumberInput DateCheck Issue DatePayeeAmount
918410/22/202110/26/2021ANOKA COUNTY TREASURY DEPT.112.50
918510/22/202110/26/2021ASPEN MILLS, INC639.65
918610/22/202110/26/2021CENTENNIAL UTILITIES514.76
918710/22/202110/26/2021CONNEXUS ENERGY472.02
918810/22/202110/26/2021EAGLE GARAGE DOOR CO.2,295.00
918910/22/202110/26/2021EMERGENCY APPARATUS MAINT, INC1,981.56
919010/22/202110/26/2021THE LINCOLN NATL LIFE INS CO37.89
919110/22/202110/26/2021DIVERSIFIED INSPECTIONS1,487.50
202101510/22/202110/26/2021US BANK621.20
Grand Totals: 8,162.08
M = Manual Check, V = Void Check
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: Requested Council Meeting Date:
October 27, 2021
VII.4
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Metro Cities' 2022 Draft Legislative Policies & Voting Delegation
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
Included in the packet are the Draft Policies for the Metro Cities (2022) Legislative Policies. They will be
holding a virtual meeting to obtain member cities' input and approval on December 9, 2021 @ noon. Staff is
looking for Council's endorsement of their policies and designation of voting delegation representing the City of
Centerville.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
Motion to approve to endorse the Metro Cities' 2022 legislative policies and authorize the City Administrator to
represent the City of Centerville as a voting delegate.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
_____
_____
Memo & Metro Cities Draft 2022 Leg.
Other (specify) ____________
_____ _____
_____
_____
Policies
_______________________________________________________________
_____ _____Ki
_____ ____________________________________________________________________
Administration Department Use:
Refer to: _________________________________
Consent
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Regular
Other: ___________________________________
October 18, 2021
TO: City Managers/Administrators
FROM: Patricia Nauman, Executive Director
RE: Draft 2022 Legislative Policies and Policy Adoption Meeting
The Metro Cities Board of Directors approved Metro CitiesÓ 2022 legislative policies at their
October meeting, following the recommendation of legislative policies by four standing legislative
policy committees. Policies will receive final adoption by Metro CitiesÓ membership on Thursday,
December 9, 2021 at 12:00 noon. Please note that this meeting, originally planned to be held in
person in conjunction with the LMCÓs fall forum, will now be conducted virtually. Stay tuned for
meeting information and details.
Each city is responsible to designate a delegate to represent their cityÓs position on policies. A
quorum is required for the adoption of policies.
Draft policies are attached and online at www.metrocitiesmn.org/2022-draft-legislative-policies
Metro CitiesÓ protocol for adoption of policies is as follows:
One vote per member city with one additional vote for each 50,000 in population
above the initial +50,000.
Policy committee chairs will present brief summaries of recommended policies.
Metro CitiesÓ President will distinguish clarifying questions and questions that could result in
a policy amendment.
Individual policies can be opened for discussion if five delegates request it.
Discussion on individual policies will be allowed and limited to 5 minutes.
If there is a motion to amend a policy, the President will honor the motion if five or more
delegates request a vote by municipality.
Any individual requesting a vote will be asked to verify their delegate status.
If five delegates request a vote, a vote will be taken by municipality.
If there is no discussion, or following any individual votes on policies, the President will
entertain a motion for adoption of policies by acclamation.
Please contact Metro CitiesÓ Office Manager Jennifer Dorn at jennifer@metrocitiesmn.org with any
questions. We look forward to seeing you on December 9th! Additional meeting details and
instructions to join the meeting will be provided in advance.
Legislative Policies
January 2022
Metro Cities
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
145 University Ave. W.
St. Paul, Minnesota, 55103-2044
Phone:(651) 215-4000
Website: www.MetroCitiesMN.org Fax: (651) 281-1299 Twitter:@MetroCitiesMN
Ms. Patricia Nauman Mr. Charlie Vander Aarde Mr. Michael Lund Ms. Jennifer Dorn
Executive Director GovÓt Relations Specialist GovÓt Relations Specialist Office Manager
(651) 215-4002 (651) 215-4001 (651) 215-4003 (651) 215-4004
Patricia@MetroCitiesMN.org Charlie@MetroCitiesMN.org Michael@MetroCitesMN.org Jennifer@MetroCitiesMN.org
Table of Contents
Municipal Revenue & Taxation1
1-AState and Local Fiscal Relationship1
1-B COVID-19 Pandemic Assistance 2
1-CRevenue Diversification and Access2
1-DRestrictions on Local Government Budgets3
1-EBudget and Financial Reporting Requirements 3
1-FLocal Government Aid (LGA)3
1-GState Property Tax Relief Programs4
1-HProperty Valuation Limits/Limited Market Value5
1-IMarket Value Homestead Exclusion Program (MVHE)5
1-JMetropolitan Area Fiscal Disparities Program5
1-KConstitutional Tax and Expenditure Limits6
1-LState Property Tax6
1-MClass Rate Tax System6
1-NRegional Facility Host Communities 6
1-OSales Tax on Local Government Purchases 7
1-PCity Revenue Stability and Fund Balance7
1-QPublic EmployeesÓ Retirement Association (PERA)7
1-RState Program Revenue Sources8
1-SPost-Employment Benefits8
1-THealth Care Insurance Programs8
1-UState Budget Stability9
1-VTaxation of Electronic Commerce9
1-WPayments for Servicesto Tax Exempt Property9
1-XProceeds from Tax Forfeited Property9
1-YVehicle Title and Registration System (VTRS) 10
1-ZSpecial Assessments 10
General Government11
2-AMandates, Zoning & Local Authority11
2-BCity Enterprise Activities11
2-CFirearms on City Property11
2-D911 Telephone Tax12
2-E800 MHz Radio System12
2-FBuilding Codes12
2-GAdministrative Fines13
2-HResidential Programs14
2-IAnnexation14
2-JStatewide Funding Sources for Local Issues with Regional Impact15
2-KUrban Forest Management Funding15
2022Legislative Policies
Table of Contents
2-LPollinator Habitat Resources16
2-MRegulation of Harmful Substances and Products16
2-NPrivate Well Drilling Restriction Authority16
2-OOrganized Waste Collection17
2-PElection Administration17
2-QUtility Franchise Fees, Accountability and Cost Transparency18
2-RWater Supply18
2-SRegulation of Message Therapists19
2-TPeace Officer Arbitration Reform20
2-UPublic Safety Training and Resources20
2-VRace Equity20
Housing & Economic Development22
Policies 3-A to 3-J: Introduction22
3-ACity Role in Housing22
3-BCity Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing23
3-CInclusionary Housing24
3-DMetropolitan Council Role in Housing25
3-EAllocation of Affordable Housing Need26
3-FHousing Performance Scores27
3-GState Role in Housing2
3-HFederal Role in Affordable and Workforce Housing30
3-IVacant, Boarded, and Foreclosed Properties and Properties at Risk31
3-JHousing Ordinance Enforcement32
3-KEconomic Development, Redevelopment and Workforce Readiness33
3-K(1) Economic Development33
3-K(2) Redevelopment34
3-K(3) Workforce Readiness35
3-LTax Increment Financing (TIF)35
3-MEminent Domain37
3-NCommunity Reinvestment38
3-OBusiness Incentives Policy39
3-PBroadband Technology39
3-QCity Role in Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development40
3-RImpaired Waters41
Metropolitan Agencies42
4-AGoals and Principles for Regional Governance42
4-BRegional Governance Structure43
4-CComprehensive Analysis and Oversight of Metropolitan Council43
2022 Legislative Policies
Table of Contents
4-DFunding Regional Services44
4-ERegional Systems44
4-FRegional Water Supply Planning45
4-GReview of Local Comprehensive Plans45
4-HComprehensive Planning Process46
4-IComprehensive Planning Schedule47
4-JLocal Zoning Authority47
4-KRegional Growth48
4-LNatural Resource Protection49
4-MInflow and Infiltration (I/I)50
4-NSewer Availability Charge (SAC)51
4-OFunding Regional Parks & Open Space52
4-PLivable Communities52
4-QDensity53
Transportation 55
Transportation Policies and Funding Introduction55
5-ARoad and Bridge Funding55
5-BRegional Transit System56
5-CTransit Financing57
5-DStreet Improvement Districts58
5-EHighwayand BridgeTurnBacks & Funding58
5-FÐ3CÑ Transportation Planning Process: Elected OfficialsÓ Role59
5-GElectronic Imaging for Enforcement of Traffic Laws59
5-HTransportation Network Companies and Alternative Transportation Modes59
5-IAirport Noise Mitigation60
5-JFunding for Non-Municipal State Aid (MSAS) City Streets60
5-KCounty State Aid Highway (CSAH) Distribution Formula61
5-LMunicipal Input/Consent for Trunk Highways and County Roads61
5-MPlat Authority61
5-NMnDOT Maintenance Budget62
5-OTransit Taxing District62
5-PComplete Streets62
Committee Rosters 64
Municipal Revenue & Taxation64
Housing & Economic Development65
Metropolitan Agencies66
Transportation & General Government67
2022Legislative Policies
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
1-AStateandLocalFiscalRelationship
A functional state and local fiscal relationship must emphasize adequacy, equitability,
sustainability and accountability for public resources and communication among thestate, cities,
andpublic. Aneffectivepartnershipmustalsoemphasizepracticesthatstrengthencollaboration
andpartnershipbetweenthe state andlocalunitsofgovernment.
Services provided by cities are traditionally funded through a combination of property taxes, fees
and state aids. Increasingly, cities are bearing more costs for services that have historically been
the responsibilityofthestate.
MetroCitiessupportsastateandlocalfiscalpartnershipthatemphasizes:
Strong financial stewardship and accountability for public resources that
emphasizes maximizing efficiencies in service delivery and effective
communicationbetweenthestateandlocalunitsofgovernmentandthepublic.
Reliable,stableandadequaterevenuesourcesincludingthe propertytaxandlocal
government aids, and dedicated funds to meet specific local government needs. Metro
Cities opposes diverting dedicated funds or local aids for the purpose of balancing
statebudgets.
Sufficientrevenuesourcesavailableto citiesthatallow citiestoaddresslocalneeds
and citizens to receive adequate services at relatively similar levels of taxation, and
thatmaintainlocal,regionalandstateeconomicvitalityandcompetitiveness.
Full state funding to cover mandates enacted by the state, and flexibility for local
governmentsinimplementingstate mandatestoensure localcostsareminimized.
Local decision-making authority regardingthe terms and conditions of
employmentfor localgovernmentemployees,includingcompensation,recognition,
andbenefit decisions.
Adequate and timely notification regarding new legislative programs ormodifications
to existing state programs or policies to allow cities sufficient time to plan for
implementationandtomanageanyeffectsonlocalbudgetingprocesses.
Supportforcooperativepurchasing arrangementsbetweenthestateandlocal unitsof
government. Such arrangements must be structured to be able to address unexpected
delays or other challenges in the procurement of goods, so that any disruptions to local
governmentoperationsandservicesthatmayresultfromsuch delaysareminimized.
Stateofficialsshouldseeklocalfeedbackinthevettingofproductvendors.
Theconcept ofperformancemeasuring,butopposition tousingstateestablished
2022 Legislative Policies
1
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
measurementstodeterminetheallocationof stateaidstolocalgovernmentsorrestrictthe
abilityoflocalgovernmentsinestablishinglocalbudgetsandlevies.
1-BCOVID-19PandemicAssistance
In 2020,$841.4millionofthestateÓsallocationoftheCoronavirusReliefFund(CRF)was
distributedto cities,counties,and townships.Metro Citiessupportedthedistribution of theCRF
funds to assist cities in addressinglocal serviceneeds and expensesrelated to theCOVID-19
pandemic, includingcertainpersonnel costsas well aslocal service and operational
improvements and modifications required toensure public health and safety.
Metro Cities supports additional federal assistance to municipalities to address revenue
losses including property taxes, utility and permit fees, local sales taxes and other revenue
streams,resultingfromtheCOVID-19pandemic, and supportedfunding appropriated
throughthefederal Local Fiscal Recovery Fund under the American Rescue Plan Act.
Metro Cities is monitoring federal rules on uses for fundsas well as federal and state
requirementsand processes.Metro Cities supportsclarity in the guidance on the usesof
funds and flexibility in eligible uses that allows local officials to sufficiently addressvaried
local needs and challenges resulting from the pandemic. Metro Cities will monitor
additional direction and clarity on uses and requirements as funds are distributed.
Metro Cities supports state financial assistance to address the long-term financial effects of
thepandemiconlocalgovernment budgets andrevenues,andchangestostatelaws to
allow cities temporary flexibility in the use of unobligated tax increment financing (TIF)
increment and unobligated local sales and lodging tax revenues, to address local financial
challenges resultingfromthepandemic.Metro Cities supported2021 statutory changes
that allow unobligated increment to be used to assist businesses.
1-CRevenueDiversificationandAccess
MetroCitiessupportsabalancedanddiversifiedrevenuesystemthatacknowledgesdiverse
city characteristics, needs and revenue capacities and allows for greater stability in
revenues.
Metro Cities is monitoring the effects of 2019 laws that modified statutory requirements for local
option salestaxesand continuestosupportthe ability ofacitytoimposealocal optionsales
tax for public improvements and capital replacement costs using local processes specified
bylawbutwithout theneedforspeciallegislation. MetroCitiessupportshavinglocalsales
taxreferendums conductedatageneralor specialelection.
The Legislature should recognize equity considerations involved with local sales taxes and
continueto provideaidsto citiesthat havehighneeds,overburdensand/orlowfiscal capacity.
Metro Cities supports a modification to state laws governing local lodging taxes to allow
citiestoimpose uptoafivepercentlocallodgingtax,andtheabilityofcitiestomodifythe
usesofrevenues tomeetlocalneeds.
2022 Legislative Policies
2
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
Metro Citiessupports current laws providing for municipal franchise fee authority and
opposes statutory changes such as reverse referendum requirements or other constraints
that would reduce local authority and flexibility for establishing, amending, or renewing
franchisefeesand interferewithlocalpublicprocessesand goalsforestablishingsuchfees.
1-DRestrictionsonLocalGovernmentBudgets
Metro Cities strongly opposes levy limits, reverse referenda, super majority requirements
for levy and valuation freezes, or other restrictions on local government budgeting and
taxing processes. Such restrictions undermine local budgeting and taxing processes, planned
growth, and the relationship between locally elected officials and their residents by allowing the
state to decide the appropriate level of local taxation and services, despite varying local
conditionsandcircumstances.
1-EBudgetandFinancialReportingRequirements
Statelawsrequirecitiestoprepareand submit orpublish numerousbudget andfinancial reports.
These requirements often create significant costs to cities, and some requirements result in
duplication. Additional reporting requirements should have a clearly defined statement of public
purpose and need not covered under existing requirements and should balance the need for
additionalinformationwiththe costsofcompilingandsubmittingthe information.
Consideringthenumerousexistingreportingrequirements, MetroCitiessupportsreducing
the number of mandated reports. Metro Cities supports efforts to consolidate municipal
government financial reporting requirements in the Office of the State Auditor, including
an electronic submission alternative to any remaining paper filing requirements, and to
authorizetheuseofweb publicationwhere newspaperpublicationiscurrentlyrequired.
Additional statutory requirements to the local truth-in-taxation process were enacted that
willtake effect in 2022. While Metro Citiesrecognizes that the additionalrequirements are
intendedtoenhancecitizen involvement inbudget processes,the new requirementsare
significantand will be administratively challenging to produce and disseminate. Existing
requirements are expansive andwere designed to maximizecitizen engagement in
budgeting processes. Metro Cities supportsa legislative review of currentand new
requirements, with local official input, prior to the law takingeffect.
1-FLocalGovernmentAid(LGA)
ThestateÓs prosperity and vitality depend significantly upon the economic strength of the
metropolitan region, and cities within the region play criticalroles in fostering the economic
development, job creation and business expansion that underpinthe stateÓseconomichealth.
Metro CitiessupportsthecityLocal GovernmentAid(LGA)programasameansof
ensuringcitiesremainaffordableplacestoliveandworkwhilemeetingthepublicservice
needsofresidents andbusinesses.
2022 Legislative Policies
3
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2013 statutory modifications to the LGA formula improvedprogram factors to betterrecognize
city needs and capacities. However, the distribution of aid continues to be geographically
disparate,andunstableforsomecities. Several metropolitan cities have experiencedprecipitous
and significant reductions in aid.
Metro CitiessupportsfurtherexaminationoftheLGA formulaand capacity and need
factors,the distribution of aid between metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities, and
stabilityfactorsin the distribution of aid.A review should includeopportunities for input by
metropolitancityofficials asprogrammodifications areconsidered, to ensure thatformula
factors adequately reflect capacities,needs and circumstances ofmetropolitan cities.
To ensure appropriation levels are adequate to meet program objectives, Metro Cities
supportsincreasingtheLGAappropriationtoaddresscitiesÓunmetneedasdefinedbythe
LGA formula as well as increases in the LGA appropriation to account for inflation. By
way of reference, the total need identified in the LGA formula for 2020 is estimated at $745
million,whereasthe currentfundingissetat$564.3 million,puttingtheremainingneedat
$180.7 million.
MetroCitiessupportsformula-based allocationsforincreasesto theLGA appropriation,
and opposes freezes of the LGA appropriation, reductions of LGA for balancing state
budget deficits,anddiversionsoftheLGAappropriationtootherpurposesorentities.
MetroCitiesalsoopposesartificiallimitsorreductionsthat singleout specificcities,and
further opposes using LGA as financial leverage to influence activitiesandpolicy
decisions atthelocallevel.
1-GStatePropertyTaxReliefPrograms
Metro Citiessupportsstatefundedpropertytaxreliefprogramspaiddirectly tohomestead
property taxpayers such as the Ðcircuit breakerÑ program and enhanced targeting for
special circumstances. Metro Cities also supports the renterÓs credit program. Metro Cities
supports an analysis of the stateÓs property tax relief programs to determine their
effectiveness and equity in providing property tax relief to individuals and families across
thestate.
MetroCitiessupportseffortsbytheMinnesotaDepartment ofRevenuetoexpandoutreach
and notificationeffortsaboutstatepropertytaxreliefprogramsto homeowners,and
notifications to local units of government to support such efforts. Metro Cities alsosupports
legislativemodificationstomaketaxreliefpaymentstotaxpayersautomatic.
Metro Cities supports the use of the Departmentof RevenueÓs ÐVossÑ database to link
incomeand propertyvalues,and theconsiderationofincomerelativetoproperty taxes
paid in determining eligibility for state property tax relief programs. Updates to the database
shouldoccurinatimelymanneranddatareviewedperiodicallyto ensurethedatabaseÓs
accuracyandusefulness.
2022 Legislative Policies
4
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
1-HPropertyValuationLimits/LimitedMarketValue
Metro Citiesopposestheuseofartificiallimitsin valuingpropertyatmarketfortaxation
purposes, sincesuch limitations shift tax burdens to other classes of property and create
disparitiesbetweenpropertiesofequalvalue.
1-IMarketValueHomesteadExclusionProgram(MVHE)
The Market Value Homestead Exclusion Program (MVHE) provides property tax relief to
qualifying homesteads, through reductions in property tax values, which shifts property taxes
within jurisdictions.TheMVHEreplacedaformerMarket ValueHomestead Credit Program,
which provided credits on local government tax bills to qualifying properties, with
reimbursementsprovidedbythestate tolocalgovernments.
Metro Cities opposes restoration of the former Market Value Homestead Credit, as
reimbursementstolocalgovernmentswereinconsistent,andencouragesfurtherstudyof
the exclusion program, with input by city officials, to determine the programÓs overall
efficacyandits effects onlocaltaxbases.
1-JMetropolitanAreaFiscalDisparitiesProgram
TheMetropolitanAreaFiscalDisparitiesProgram,enactedin1971,wascreatedfor thepurposes
of:
providing a wayforlocal governmentstoshareintheresourcesgeneratedbythegrowthof
themetropolitanareawithoutremovingexistingresources;
promotingorderly developmentoftheregionbyreducing theimpactoffiscal
considerationsonthe locationofbusiness and infrastructure;
establishing incentivesforall partsofthe areatowork forthegrowthoftheareaasa
whole;
helpingcommunitiesat variousstagesofdevelopment;and
encouragingprotectionoftheenvironmentbyreducingtheimpactoffiscal
considerationstoensureprotectionofparks,openspaceandwetlands.
MetroCitiessupportstheFiscalDisparitiesProgram. MetroCitiesopposesanydiversion
from the fiscal disparities pool to fund specific state, regional or local programs, goals or
projectsassuchdiversionscontradictthepurposes oftheprogram.
Legislation that would modify or impact the fiscal disparities program should only be considered
within a framework of comprehensive reform efforts of the stateÓs property tax, aids and credits
system.Any proposedlegislationthatwouldmodifyorimpactthefiscaldisparitiesprogram
2022 Legislative Policies
5
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
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 programÓsintendedpurposes.
MetroCitiesopposeslegislationthatwouldallowforcapturing andpooling growthin
residentialtaxcapacitytofundspecific programs or objectives.
Furtherstudiesortask forcesto considermodificationsto thefiscal disparitiesprogrammust
include participationandinputfrommetropolitanlocalgovernmentrepresentatives.
1-KConstitutionalTaxandExpenditureLimits
MetroCitiesstronglyopposesincludingtax andexpenditurelimitsinthestateconstitution,
as such limits eliminate flexibility by the Legislature or local governments to respond to
unanticipatedcriticalneeds,emergencies,orfluctuatingeconomic situations.
When services such as education, public safety and health care require increased funding beyond
the overall limit, other publicly funded services potentially stand to receive inadequate resources.
Constitutional limits result in reduced revenue bases during times of economic downturn and the
inabilitytorecovertoprevious servicelevels wheneconomic prosperity returns.
1-LStatePropertyTax
The state levies a property tax on commercial/industrial and cabin property. Since citiesÓ only
source of general funds is the property tax, Metro Cities opposes extension of the state
propertytaxtoadditionalclasses ofproperty.MetroCitiesopposes usingthestate
property tax to fund specific programs or objectives generally funded through state income
andsalestaxrevenue.
In the interest of increasing transparency, Metro Cities supports efforts to have the state
provide information on the property tax statementregarding the state property tax. Metro
Citiesopposesexempting specificclassesofproperty underthetaxassuch exemptionsshift
the costs ofthetaxontootherclassesofproperty.
1-MClassRateTaxSystem
MetroCitiesopposeseliminationoftheclassratetax systemorapplyingfuturelevy
increasestomarketvaluesince thisfurther complicatesthepropertytaxsystem.
1-NRegionalFacilityHostCommunities
Municipalities hosting regional facilities such as utilities, landfills or aggregate mining incur
costs and effects such as environmental damage or lost economic development opportunities.
Communities should be compensated to accommodate the effects of facilities that provide
benefitsto theregion and state.MetroCitiessupportslegislativeeffortsto offsetthenegative
2022 Legislative Policies
6
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
effects of these facilities and activities on host communities. Metro Cities would prefer that
municipalities be allowed to collect a host fee that may be adjusted when state decisions affect
those fees.
1-OSalesTaxonLocalGovernmentPurchases
Metro Citiessupportedthe2013reinstatementofthesalestax exemptionforpurchasesof
goods and services made by cities. This reinstatement does not apply to all local government
purchases.
Toensurecitizensreceivethefullbenefit ofthisexemption,thelawshould treat purchasesofall
local government units the same, including purchases made by special taxing districts, joint
powersentities,oranyotheragencyorinstrumentalityoflocalgovernment.
Metro Citiessupportssimplifyingtheprocessontheexemptionforconstructionmaterials
thatiscomplex andcostineffectiveor convertingtheprocesstoa refundprogram.Metro
Cities supportedthe law enacted in 2021that exempts construction materials purchased to
construct public safety facilitiesfrom state sales tax.
MetroCitiessupportsgrantinganextension ofthemotorvehiclesalestax exemptionto all
municipal vehicles that are used for general city functions and are provided by
governmental entities. Currently, only certain vehicles, including road maintenance vehicles
purchased by townships, and municipal fire trucks and police vehicles not registered for use on
public roads,areexemptfromtheMVST.
1-PCityRevenueStabilityandFundBalance
Metro Cities opposes state attempts to control or restrict city fund balances, or to use city
fund balances as a rationale for reducing state aids or property tax payment delays. These
funds are necessary to maintain fiscal viability, meet unexpected or emergency resource needs,
purchase capital goods and infrastructure, provide adequate cash flow and maintain high level
bondratings.
1-QPublicEmployees Ó RetirementAssociation(PERA)
Metro Cities supports employees and cities sharing equally in the cost of necessary
contribution increases and a sixty percent employer/forty percent employee split for the
PERA Police and Fire Plan. Metro Cities also supports state assistance to local
governmentsto coverany additionalcontribution burdensplacedon citiesoverandabove
contribution increases required by employees. Cities should receive sufficient notice of these
increasessothatthey may take themintoaccountforbudgetingpurposes.
Metro Cities opposes benefit improvements for active employees or retirees until the
financialhealthofthePERAGeneralPlanandPERA PoliceandFirePlanarerestored.
Metro Cities supports modifications to help align PERA contributions and costs, and
2022 Legislative Policies
7
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
reduce the need for additional contribution increases, including a modification of PERA
eligibility guidelines to account for temporary, seasonal and part-time employment
situations, the use of pro-rated service credit and a comprehensive review of exclusions to
simplify eligibility guidelines. Further employer contribution rate increases should be avoided
untilothercostalignmentmechanismsareconsidered.
MetroCitiessupportscitiesand firereliefassociationsworkingtogethertodeterminethe
best application of State Fire Aid. Flexibility in the application of State Fire Aid, where
combination departments exist, will ensure that fire services can be provided in the most cost-
effective means possible.
Regarding police pension contributions, Metro Cities supports a proactive review of factors
contributing to the financial status of police and fire pension plans, to ensure that
structural adjustments are considered in conjunction with potential increases in employee
and employer contribution rates. Specifically, an area that could be considered is contractual
overtime impacts onpensionlevels.
Metro Citiessupportsremovingthesunsetofthe PERAaidthatispaid tolocalunitsof
governmenttohelpaddressincreasedemployercontributioncosts.
1-RStateProgramRevenueSources
Metro Citiesopposesany attemptbythestateto financeprogramsofstatewidevalueand
significance, that are traditionally funded with state revenues, with local revenue sources
such as municipal utilities or property tax mechanisms. Statewide programs serve
important state goals and objectives and should be financed through traditional state
revenue sources suchas theincome orsalestax.
Metro Cities further opposes substituting traditionally state funded programs with funding
mechanismsthatwoulddisparatelyaffecttaxpayers inthemetropolitanarea.
1-SPost-EmploymentBenefits
MetroCitiessupportedstatutorychangesthat allowlocalgovernmentstoestablishtrusts
from which to fund post-employment health and life insurance benefits for public
employees, with participation by cities on a strictly voluntary basis, in recognitionthat
cities have differing local needs and circumstances. Cities should also retain the ability to
determine the levelofpost-employmentbenefitstobe providedtoemployees.
1-THealthCareInsurancePrograms
Metro Cities supports legislative efforts to control health insurance costs but opposes
actions that undermine local flexibility to manage rising insurance costs. Metro Cities
encouragesa full examinationoftherising costsofhealth care andthe impactson cityemployers
and employees. Metro Cities also supports a study of the fiscal impacts to both cities and
retireesofpoolingretirees separatelyfromactiveemployees.
2022 Legislative Policies
8
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
1-UStateBudgetStability
Metro Cities strongly supports a state revenue system that provides for stability, flexibility
and adequacy in the system, reduces the volatility of state revenues and improves the long-
term balance of state revenues and expenditures. Metro Cities supports a statutory budget
reserve minimum that is adequate to manage risks and fluctuations in the stateÓs tax
system and a cash flow reserve account of sufficient size so that the state can avoid short-
termborrowingtomanagecashflowfluctuations.
Metro Cities also supports an examination of the property tax system and the relationships
between state and local tax bases, with an emphasis on state budget cuts and effects on
property taxes. State budget deficitsmust be balanced withstatewidesourcesandmust not
further reduce funding for property tax relief programs and aids to local governments that result
in local governmentsbearingmoreresponsibility forthe costsofservicesthat belong tothestate.
1-VTaxationofElectronicCommerce
Metro Citiessupportseffortstodevelopastreamlined salesandusetaxsystemtosimplify
sales and use tax collection and administration by retailers and states. Metro Cities
supports policies that encourage remote retailers to collect and remit state sales taxes in
statesthatare complyingwiththe StreamlinedSalesandUse TaxAgreement.
Metro Cities opposes legislation that allows accommodation intermediaries such as online
travel companies a tax exemption that terminates obligations to pay hotel taxes tostate and
local governments,or otherwise restrictslegalactionsbystatesandlocalities.The
Legislaturein2011clarifiedthat these servicesaresubject tostate salestax.MetroCities
su pportsstatutorychangestofurtherclarifythatalllodgingtaxes, whetheradministered by the
state or locally, apply to total charges, including charges for services provided byaccommodation
intermediaries.
1-WPaymentsforServicestoTaxExemptProperty
Metro Cities supports city authority to collect payments from tax exempt property owners
to cover the costs of services to those entities, similar to statutory authority for special
assessments. Metro Cities opposes legislation that would exempt nonprofit entities from
payinguserfees andservicecharges.
1-XProceedsfromTaxForfeitedProperty
Metro Cities supports changes to state laws governing the proceeds for tax forfeited
properties. Currently, counties can recover administrative costs related to a property before
other allocations are madeand the law allows for the county to recoup a percentage of
assessment costs once administrative costs are allocated. The result is often no allocation or a
very low allocation, and usually insufficient level of proceeds available for covering special
assessments, unpaid taxes and fees to cities. State processes addressing tax-forfeited properties
2022 Legislative Policies
9
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
can have implicationsforlocallanduseplansandrequirementsandcanresultinunexpected and
significant fiscal impacts on local communities. The current process also does not require the
repaymentofunpaidutilitycharges orbuildinganddevelopmentfees.
MetroCitiessupportsstatutory changesthatbalancerepaymentofunpaidtaxesand
assessments, utility charges and other fees and that more equitably allocates the
distributionofproceeds betweencountiesandcities.
1-YVehicleTitleandRegistrationSystem(VTRS)
Issues associatedwiththerolloutofthestateMNLicensingandRegistrationSystem
(MNLARS) have caused significant unanticipated and ongoing disruptions to services provided
by local deputy registrars. Some registrar offices have relied on other local revenues, such as the
property tax, to manage normal expenses due to unresolved glitches in the system and a shift
from the state to the local level for additional processing time. These challenges have also
created a high potential for negative public perceptions on local government services, on an issue
overwhichlocalgovernmentshavenoabilitytocontrol.
In 2019, state officials elected to replace the MNLARS system with the Vehicle Title and
Registration System (VTRS). Metro Cities supports state funding to compensate local
deputyregistrarsforunanticipated,increasedcostsassociatedwithimplementationofthe
new system, and the shifting of per-transaction processing burdens that may result from
the implementationofVTRS.
Asthestateworkstoidentify efficienciesinthevehicleregistrationprocessandsystem,policy
makers must consider the effects of changes on the financial viability of deputy registrars
resultingfromdecreasesintransactionfeescollectedbylocalregistrars.
MetroCitiessupportsincreasesto existingtransactionfeelevelsthataresetby statelaw,to
ensure that local deputy registrars can sufficiently function and meet continually evolving
local registrar service needs and address any necessary modifications to registrar
operationstoensurethese servicescanbe providedsafelytothepublic.
1-ZSpecialAssessments
When property owners challenge special assessments based on application of the special benefit
test, some courts have interpreted Ðbenefits receivedÑ to mean the one-year increase in property
value thatis directlyattributabletoaconstructionproject. There is currentlynoconsistency
between state laws and rulings by some courts on the term Ðbenefits receivedÑ. Metro Cities
supportsmodificationstostatelawsgoverningspecialassessmentsforconstruction projects
or other improvementsarisingfromlegislativeauthoritytoclarifythe definitionof
Ðbenefits receivedÑ. The modified definition should more closely align with how special
assessments are calculated and recognizes that the benefit of the improvement to a propertymay
be realizedovertimeandnotwithinoneyear.
2022 Legislative Policies
10
General Government
2-AMandates,Zoning&LocalAuthority
To serve their local citizens and communities, city officials must have sufficient local control
and decision-making authority. Metro Cities supports local decision-making authority and
opposesstatutorychangesthaterodelocalauthorityanddecisionmaking.
Minn.Stat.§ 462.357,subd.1,providecitiesauthority toregulateandset localordinancesfor
zoning.MetroCitiessupports existingstate lawsthatprovideforthis authority.
Metro Cities supports statutory changes that give local officials greater authority to
approve or denyvariancestoallowflexibilityinrespondingtotheneeds ofthecommunity.
Metro Cities also supports the removal of statutory barriers to uniform zoning ordinance
amendmentprocessesforallcities,regardlessofcitysizeclassification.
MetroCitiesopposestheimpositionoflegislativemandatesthatincreaselocal costswithout
acorresponding stateappropriationorfundingmechanism.Unfunded mandatespotentially
increasepropertytaxesandimpedecitiesÓ abilitytofundtraditional serviceneeds.
To allow for greater collaboration and flexibility in providing local services, Metro Cities
encourages the removal of barriers to coordination between cities and other units of government
orentities.
2-BCityEnterpriseActivities
Creation ofanenterprise operationallowsa citytoprovide adesiredservicewhile maintaining
financial and management control. The state should refrain from infringing on this ability to
provide andmanageservices forthebenefitofa local communityand residents.
Metro Cities supports cities having authority to establish city enterprise operations in
response to community needs, local preferences,or state mandates, or that help ensure
residentsÓqualityoflife.
2-CFirearmsonCityProperty
Cities should be allowed to prohibit handguns and other weapons in city-owned buildings,
facilities,and parks and to determine whether to allow permit-holders to bring guns into
municipal buildings, liquor stores, city council chambers and city sponsored youth activities. It is
not Metro CitiesÓ intention for cities to have the authority to prohibit legal weapons in parking
lots,oncitystreets,citysidewalksoronlocallyapprovedhuntingland.
MetroCitiessupportslocalcontroltoalloworprohibithandgunsandother weaponson
city-ownedproperty.
2022 Legislative Policies
11
General Government
2-D911Telephone Tax
Public safety answeringpoints(PSAPs)must be abletocontinuetorelyonstate911revenuesto
pay for upgrades and modifications to local 911 systems, maintenance and operational support
anddispatchertraining.
Metro Cities supports state funding for technology and training necessary to provide the
number and location of wireless and voice over internet protocol (VoIP) calls to 911 on
computerscreensandtransmitthatdatatopolice,fireandfirstresponders.
2-E800MHzRadioSystem
Metro Cities urges the Legislature to provide cities with the financial means to obtain required
infrastructure and subscriber equipment (portable and mobile radios) as well as provide funding
for operating costs, since the prime purpose of this system is to allow public safety agencies and
otherunits ofgovernmenttheabilitytocommunicateeffectively.
MetroCitiessupportstheworkoftheMetropolitanEmergencyServicesBoard(previously
the Metropolitan Radio Board) in implementing and maintaining the 800 MHz radio
systemso long ascities are not forced to modify their current systems or become a part of
the 800MHzRadioSystemunless theysochoose.
2-FBuildingCodes
Thousands of new housing units as well as commercial and industrial buildings are constructed
annually in the metropolitan area. The State Building Code (SBC) sets statewide standards for
theconstruction,reconstruction,alteration,andrepairofbuildingsandother structuresgoverned
by the code. A building code provides many benefits, including uniformity of construction
standards in the building industry, consistency in code interpretation and enforcement, and life-
safetyguidance.
Metro Cities supports an equitable distribution of fees from the Construction Code Fund,
with proportional distribution based on the area of enforcement where fees were received.
MetroCitiesfurthersupportseffortsbythestate,cities,andbuilderstocollectivelyidentify
appropriate uses for the fund, including education, analysis of new materials and
constructiontechniques,buildingcodeupdating,buildinginspector training,and
developmentofperformancestandardsandidentificationofconstructionÐbestpractices.Ñ
Metro Cities supports including the International Green Construction Code as an optional
appendix to the State Building Code to allow cities to utilize appropriate parts of those
guidelines in their communities. Metro Cities also supports adopting the international
energyconservation codetothestatebuildingcodewithout amendments.MetroCitiesdoes
2022 Legislative Policies
12
General Government
notsupportlegislativesolutionsthatfailtorecognizetheinterrelationshipsamongbuilders,
state buildingcodes andcities.
Metro Cities supports efforts to increase awareness of the potential impacts and benefits of
requiring sprinklers in new homes and townhouses. Metro Cities supports discussion andthe
dissemination of information on these impacts via the code adoption process throughthe
Department of Labor and Industry. Metro Cities supports adopting and amending theState
BuildingCodethroughtherulemaking processand opposeslegislativechangestobuilding
codesabsentunusualorextraordinarycircumstances.
Asenergycostscontinue torise,moreattentionmustbepaidtothe poorenergyefficiencyof
muchoftheexisting housingstockaswellascommercialandindustrialbuildings.
Homes and other buildings that are energy inefficient are more costly to maintain andcreate
addedcosttoownershipandoccupancy.Making homesandbuildingsmoreenergyefficient will
make them more affordable to operate and will help the state achieve energydemandgoals and
willreduce greenhousegasemissions.This includes supporting legislation to increase the
efficiency of buildings on a pathway toward net zero energy.
Metro Cities supports state funding and technical support for programs that provide
support for property owners for weatherization and energy efficiency improvements,
includingprograms availableforlocalgovernments.
Whilea singleset ofcoordinatedcodeshelpsprovideconsistency incodeadministrationand
enforcement, implementation of sustainable building design, construction, andoperation does
not readily integrate with the existing state building and energy codesystem. As a result,
many cities are interested in adopting stronger local standards forsustainable development
andconservation.
MetroCitiessupportsauthorizingcitiestoemploystrongerlocalstandardsforsustainable
development andconservationthatwillhelpinformthestatecodedevelopmentprocess.
The state shouldinclude anoptionalsustainableappendixtotheStateBuildingCodeto
allow citiestoutilizeappropriatepartsofguidelinesintheir communities.
2-GAdministrativeFines
Traditionalmethodsof citation,enforcementand prosecutionhavemet withincreasing coststo
localunitsofgovernment.The useofadministrative finesisa tooltomoderate thosecosts.
Metro Cities supports the administrative fine authority that allows cities to issue
administrative fines for defined local traffic offenses and supports further modifications to
enhance functionality of this authority. Metro Cities continues to support citiesÓ authority
to use administrative fines for regulatory ordinances such as building codes, zoning codes,
healthcodes,andpublicsafetyandnuisanceordinances.
Metro Cities supports the use of city administrative fines, at a minimum, for regulatory
mattersthatarenotduplicativeofmisdemeanororhigher-level statetrafficandcriminal
2022 Legislative Policies
13
General Government
offenses.Metro Citiesalso endorsesafairhearing processbeforeadisinterestedthirdparty.
2-HResidentialPrograms
Sufficientfunding andoversightisneeded toensure that residentslivingin residentialprograms
have appropriate care and supervision and that neighborhoods are not disproportionately
impacted by high concentrations of residential programs. Historically, federal and state laws
have discouraged the concentration of residential group homes so as not to promote areas that
reinforce institutionalqualitysettings.
Undercurrentlaw,operators ofcertainresidentialprograms arenotrequiredtonotifycities
when they intend to purchase single-family housing for this purpose. Cities do not have the
authority to regulate the locations of residential programs. Cities have reasonable concerns about
high concentrations of these facilities in residential neighborhoods, and additional traffic and
servicedeliveriessurroundingthese facilitieswhenthey are groupedcloselytogether.
Municipalities recognize and support the services residential programs provide. However, cities
also have an interest in preserving balance between residential programs and other uses in
residentialneighborhoods.
Providers applying to operate residential programs should be required to notify the city when
applying for licensure to be informed of local ordinance requirements as a part of the application
process.Licensing agenciesshould berequiredtonotifythecity ofpropertiesreceiving licensure
tobeoperatedasresidentialprograms.
Metro Cities supports changes to Minn. Stat. § 245A.11, subd. 4, to allow for appropriate
non-concentration standards for all types of cities to prevent clustering. Metro Cities
supports statutory modifications to require licensed agencies and licensed providers that
operate residential programs to notify the city of properties being operated as residential
programs. Metro Cities also supports the establishment of appropriate non-concentration
standards for residential programs, to prevent clustering, and supports enforcement of
theserulesbytheappropriatecountyagencies.
2-IAnnexation
Attempts have been made in recent years to reduce tensions between cities and townships in
annexations.AMunicipalBoundaryAdjustmentTaskForce workedtodevelop
recommendations regarding best practices annexation training for city and township officials to
better communicate and jointly plan potential annexations. While the task force defined
differences between cities and townships, no significant advancements were made in creating
bestpractices.
Metro Cities supports continued legislative efforts to develop recommendations regarding
best practices and annexation training for city and township officialsto better
communicate and plan for potential annexations. Further, Metro Cities supports
substantivechangestothestate'sannexationlawsthatwillleadtobetterlanduseplanning,
2022 Legislative Policies
14
General Government
energyconservation, greaterenvironmentalprotection,fairertaxbases, clarification offee
reimbursement and fewer conflicts between townships and cities. Metro Cities also
supportstechnicalannexationchangesthatareagreedtobycitiesandtownships.
2-JStatewideFundingSourcesforLocalIssueswithRegionalImpact
Many issues including, but not limited to, a metropolitan area groundwater monitoring network,
emerald ash borer management, and the cleanup of storm-water retention ponds, come with
significantlocalcosts,andhaveeffectsthatreachbeyondmunicipalboundaries.
MetroCitiessupportstheavailabilityofstatewidefundingsourcestoaddresslocalissues
thathave regional orstatewidesignificanceorare caused bystateorregional actions.
Metro Citiesopposesany requirementtoenactordinancesmore restrictivethanstatelaw
inexchangeforaccess tothesefunds.
2-KUrbanForestManagementFunding
Urban forests are an essential local infrastructure component. Dutch elm disease, oak wilt
disease, drought, storms, and emerald ash borer threaten public investments in trees and
controlling these issues can be greatly consequential for city budgets. The Minnesota Department
of Natural Resources, through its Urban and Community Forestry program, and the Minnesota
Department of Agriculture, through its Shade Tree and Invasive Species program, have
regulatory authority to direct tree sanitation and control programs. Although these programs
allow for addressing some tree disease, pest, and other problems, funding has been inadequate to
meet theneed ofcitiesto build capacity fortreeprogramsand respond to catastrophicproblems.
Cities share the goal of the stateÓs Re-leaf ProgramÏpromoting and funding the inventory,
planning, planting, maintenance, and improvement of trees in cities throughout the state. In
addition, economic and environmental gains for storm water management, climate change
mitigation, air quality management, tourism, recreation, and other benefits must be protected
from treeloss.Alack oftimely investmentin urbanforestscostscitiessignificantly morein the
longrun.
Metro Cities supports funding for a state matching grant program to assist cities with
building and increasing capacity for urban forest management, meeting the costs of
preparing for, and responding to, catastrophic urban forest problems and preventing
further loss and increasing canopy coverage. Specifically, direct grants to cities are
desperatelyneeded fortheidentification,removal,replacement,andtreatment oftreesrelated to
management of emerald ash borer (EAB).The state should establish an ongoing grant program
with annual funding thatis usableforthoseactivities.
2022 Legislative Policies
15
General Government
2-LPollinatorHabitatResources
Recent declines in the abundance of pollinator insects, such as bees and butterflies, have been
identified by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization as a threat to food security,
as these insects are an important method of plant pollination. According to the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, the main threats facing pollinators are habitat loss, degradation and
fragmentation.Pollinatorslosefoodandnestingsitestheyneedtosurvivewhen native
vegetation is replaced by roadways, manicured lawns, crops and non-native gardens. This can
haveadded detrimenttopollinatorsthat migrate. Research hasshownthat providingtheseinsects
with more habitat can create the conditions for these insect populations to recover. Converting
traditional grass lawns has been identified as way to increase pollinator habitat. The Minnesota
Legislature created the Lawns to Legumes program, which provides grants to private
homeownerstoconverttraditionallawns topollinatorfriendlylandscape.
Metro CitiessupportsstatefundingfortheLawnsto Legumesprogramandsupports
expanding eligibility of this program to cities. Metro Cities supports state funding to
programsthatcreatepollinator habitatonbothpublicandprivate lands.
2-MRegulationofHarmfulSubstancesandProducts
In metropolitan regions where most cities share boundaries with other cities, local bans of
harmful drugs and substances such as synthetic drugs, which have been found to be dangerous,
do noteliminateaccesstothese productsunlessallcitiestakethe same regulatory action.
Metro Cities supports statewide regulation and prohibition of products or substances in
circumstances where there is evidence that products present a danger to anyone who uses
them, where there is broad local support for a ban and where corresponding regulatory
issueshaveregionalorstatewidesignificance.
In addition, the Legislature should provide for the regulation of products that are known to
damage water quality, sewer collection, and stormand wastewater treatment systems, not just at
the treatment and infrastructure maintenance levels, but at the consumer and manufacturing
levels, through accurate labeling of products, public education, and recycling and re-use
programs.
2-NPrivateWellDrillingRestrictionAuthority
Cities are authorized to enact ordinances that disallow the placement of private wells within city
limits to ensure both water safety and availability for residents and businesses. This authority is
important for the appropriate management of local water supply conservation efforts. Municipal
water systemsarefinancially dependent upon usersto operateandmaintain thesystem.Alossof
significantrate payers resultingfromunregulatedprivate welldrillingwouldeconomically
2022 Legislative Policies
16
General Government
destabilizewater systemsand couldleadtocontamination ofthewatersupply.
MetroCitiessupportscurrentlawauthorizing citiestoregulateandprohibittheplacement
of private wells within municipal utility service boundaries and opposes any attempt to
remove or alter that authority. Metro Cities supports funding that can be used to cap
private wells.
2-OOrganizedWasteCollection
Cities over 1,000 in population are required by law to ensure all residents have solid waste
collection available to them. A city can meet the statutory requirement by licensing haulers to
operate in an open collection system, authorize city employees to collect waste, or implement
organizedcollection throughoneormultiplehaulerstoincreaseefficiency,reducetrucktraffic
andcontrolcosts toresidents.
Metro Citiessupportscurrentlawsthatallowcitiestoworkwithexistinghaulerstoachieve
the benefits of organized collection or investigate the merits of organized collection without
the pressure of a rigid timeline and requirement to pass Òan intent to organizeÓ at the
beginning of the discussion process. Metro Cities opposes any legislation that would further
increase the cost or further complicate the process cities are required to follow to organize
waste collection or prohibit cities from implementing, expanding or using organized waste
collection. Metro Cities supports state funding to local governments to increase the
availabilityofmaterialandorganicrecycling.
2-PElectionAdministration
Citiesplaya criticalrole inmanaging and ensuringtheintegrityofelections.Anychangesmade
to election laws should not place undue financial or administrative burdens on local
governments. Metro Cities supports reimbursement by the state to local units of
governmentforanycostsassociatedwithchanges toelectionlaws.
MetroCitiessupportslawstoincreaseefficienciesin administeringabsenteeballots,to
reduce the potentialfor errorsandtoimprove absentee ballotingprocesses.
State laws that allow the filling of municipal vacancies by special election on one of four days
specified in law, can create logistical and financial challenges for municipalities. Metro Cities
supports changes to state laws that allow sufficient flexibility for municipalities in
addressingvacanciesinmunicipaloffices.
MetroCitiesfurthersupports:
Lawsallowingin-personabsenteevoterstoplacetheirballotsinasecuretabulator,
andstatutorychanges toallowthisfor thedurationofabsenteevoting;
Establishinganearlierdeadlineforendingin-personabsenteevoting;
2022 Legislative Policies
17
General Government
Revising absentee ballot regulations to allow any person 18 and older to witness the
absentee process andsigntheenvelope as awitness;and
Authorizing cities with health care facilities to schedule election judges to conduct
absentee votingatanearlier dateinhealthcarefacilities.
2-QUtilityFranchiseFees,AccountabilityandCostTransparency
Minnesota cities are authorized by Minn. Stat. 216B and Minn. Stat. § 301B.01 to require a
public utility (gas or electric) that provides services to the city or occupies the public right of
way within acityto obtainafranchise.Severalmetro areacitieshaveenteredagreementsthat
require the utilitytopayafee tohelpoffsetcostsofmaintainingtherightofway.
Cities are also adopting energy policies that use renewable energy resources to light or heat
public facilities. Policies and programs have also been instituted in cooperation with the public
utility franchisee to increase energy efficiency for all users. Cities also contract, at city expense,
with public utilities to ÐundergroundÑ wires. State laws also require energy companies to provide
moreelectric energyfromrenewable sources.Thespecific amountsvarybytypeofutility.
MetroCitiessupports:
State policies adopted by legislation or through rules of the Public Utility
Commission that provide cities with the authority to include city energy policies
andprioritiesinafranchise orsimilar agreementwithafranchisee;and
Greater accountability and transparency for city paid costs associated with
underground utility andsimilar work performed by electric utilities as part of a
localproject.
2-RWaterSupply
Municipalwatersuppliersarecharged withmeeting thewater supplyneedsof theircommunities
and work to do so with safe, reliable,and cost-effective systems that are sustainable both for
establishedcitiesandforallfuturegrowth.
The aquifers in the metropolitan area cross municipal boundaries and therefore require a
coordinated regional approachtoplanningfortheirfutureavailability.Currently,approximately
75% of municipal water supply in the metropolitan area comes from groundwater. With proper
management of the resource, the current water supply in the region is adequate; however,
Metropolitan Council projections predict localized declines in aquifer availability due to
populationgrowthestimates ifcurrentusagelevels aremaintained.
Regulation ofwateriscomplexand compartmentalized.Variousagenciespermititsuse,planfor
itsavailability,regulatestormwater,treatwastewaterand protectthesafety ofwater.To ensure
2022 Legislative Policies
18
General Government
that water supply remains adequate and sustainable across the region, we must understand how
much water can be sustainably drawn from the aquifers and what effect increases in re-use,
conservation and recharge can have on the sustainability and availability of both groundwater
andsurfacewater.Manyofthesestrategiescrossagencyjurisdictionsand willrequireimproved
coordinationandcooperation.
Municipal water suppliers have made significant infrastructure investments in their systems
based on calculated water availability and DNR permits. Proposals to reduce the reliance on
groundwater by switchingmunicipal watersystemsfrom groundwatertosurfacewatersupplies
willcome withsignificantcoststhatcouldplace excessive burdensonlocalresources.
The outcomes and benefits of re-balancing the mix of groundwater and surface water use for
specific municipalities and the region must be identifiable before any projects are undertaken.
The sustainability of our water supply is an issue of regional and statewide significance and the
expenseofany necessary projectsthatbenefit theregion should notfallonindividual cities.Any
attemptstoaddresswatersupplysustainabilitymust alsotakeinto accountallwaterusers,
including municipal water suppliers, industry, private wells, agriculture and contamination
containment.
The metropolitan region must consider the effects of groundwater use beyond the borders of the
metropolitan area on the regionÓs groundwater availability and the cost of treating contaminants
insurfacewaterthatcomesintothemetropolitan areaforuse.
Metro Cities supports the removal of barriers to wastewater and storm water re-use,
improved inter-agency coordination, clarifying the appropriate roles of local, regional and
state governments with respect to water, streamlining and consolidating permit approval
processes and the availability of statewide resources to plan for and ensure the future
sustainability of water supply in the metropolitan area. Metro Cities also encourages the
MetropolitanCouncil,inconsultation withmunicipalities,tofind waystore-usewastewater and
todevelopotherstrategies toimprove conservation.
Metro Cities supports state funding for costs associated with converting water supply from
groundwater to surface water and funds to encourage and promote water conservation as a
strategy toimprove water sustainabilityandtoimprove andprotectwaterquality.
2-SRegulationofMassage Therapists
In the absence of statewide regulation for massage therapy practitioners, many cities have
enacted local ordinances that require massage therapists to obtain a local professional license to
assist law enforcement in differentiating between legitimate providers and illegitimate businesses
frontingas massagetherapyestablishments.
Metro Citiessupportsstatewideregistrationorlicensureofmassage therapiststoaidlocal
law enforcement efforts in this area. Metro Cities supports citiesÓ ability to continue to
license massagetherapybusinesses.
2022 Legislative Policies
19
General Government
2-TPeaceOfficerArbitrationReform
Manymunicipalitiesinthemetropolitanareaprovidelawenforcementservices andemploy
licensedpeace officers.Toensurethe publicÓssafetyandtrust,andtostrengthen collaboration
betweencitizens andpeaceofficers,citiesmusthavetheauthoritytoeffectivelygovernlocal
law enforcement agencies. City officials are ultimately responsible for the safety and protection
ofthelocalcommunity.
Metro Cities supports statutory arbitration reforms to allow for the discipline, including
removal, of law enforcement officers who have been found to have violated local law
enforcementagencypolicies.
MetroCitiesfurthersupports areasonablestandardofreviewinlawenforcement
arbitrationcases,whichwould limitthedeterminationofarbitratorstowhetherthe
actions of an employer were reasonable and consistent with city and agency policies. Metro
Citiesfurthersupportsusingadministrativelawjudges (ALJs)orarbitrationtoaddress
grievancesanddisciplinerelatedtopolicemisconduct.
2-U Public SafetyTrainingandResources
MetroCitiesacknowledges thatthetasks publicsafetyresponders havebeenaskedtoaddress
are increasingly the result of inadequate social services and programs. Metro Cities recognizes
theneedforadequateresources forsocialservice andmentalhealthservices andprograms to
helpreducetheneedforpublicsafetyresponders toperformtheseservices.
MetroCitiessupports statefundingforpublicsafetyresponders training,including
training for crisis management, cultural awareness and implicit bias, mental health and
de-escalation,andsupportsfundingforequipmentsuchas bodycameras.
2-V Race Equity
Intheseven-countymetropolitanregion, peopleofcolorrepresent28%ofthepopulation, and
this percentage isexpectedtogrowto44%by2050,accordingtothecurrentpopulationforecast
fromtheMetropolitan Council.Asracialandethnicdiversityincreasesintheregion, peopleof
color continue to experience significant barriers in housing, employment, criminal justice, public
infrastructure, health, and education, and disparities are becoming more apparent with the
COVID-19pandemicandcivilunrestthatis occurringinmanycommunities.
Acrossthemetropolitanregion,manycitiesareworkingtoexaminelocalpoliciesandsystems,
torevisethedeliveryofpublicservices,andtoallocateresources tohelpadvanceraceequity.
Alllevels ofgovernmentaswellas thenonprofitandbusiness sectors haverolestoplayin
2022 Legislative Policies
20
General Government
addressingraceinequitiesandmustworkcollaborativelytoensurethatservicesandresources
areconsidered,designed and implementedin a comprehensive,purposeful,informedand
inclusive waytoachieve raceequity.
MetroCitiessupports:
Anexamination andrevisionofexistingstate,regional,countyandcitylaws,
ordinancesandpoliciestoaddress racialdisparities;
State, regional, county and city resources to assist with comprehensive data
collection,disaggregationandsharingtoensureinformedpolicyandfunding
decisionsatalllevels ofgovernment;
Fundingtoassist inthedevelopmentoftoolsandresourcesthat advanceracially
equitable outcomes;
Activating partnerships among state, regional, and local governmental institutions
andotherentitiestoadvanceraceequity.
2022 Legislative Policies
21
Housing & Economic Development
Policies3-Ato3-J:Introduction
While the provision of housing is predominantly a private sector, market-driven activity, all
levels of government Îfederal, state, regional and local Îhave a rolein facilitating the
productionandpreservationofaffordablehousinginMinnesota.
Adequate affordable housing is a significant concern for the metropolitan region and effective
approachesrequire participationfromalllevelsofgovernment,theprivate sector,and
nonprofit groups.
3-ACityRole inHousing
Cities in Minnesota are responsible for most ground-level housing policy, including land
useplanning, code enforcement, rental licensing, and often the packaging of multi-level financial
incentives.Citiesareresponsibleforensuringlocalhealth andsafetyand thestructuralsoundness
and livability of the local housing stock through building permits and inspections.
Cities are charged with providing public infrastructure to serve current and future residents and
must assess the effects of a new development on parks, local roads, water, sanitary sewer, and
stormwater capacities to ensure that additional needs for infrastructure are assumed by the new
development and not current taxpayers. It is the city that assumes the future financial
responsibility, management, and maintenance for improvements and infrastructure after a
developer has completed a project.
It is also the responsibility of cities to periodicallyreview local requirements such as land use
regulations and ordinances, and make long range plans consistent with state statute, to ensure that
they areconsistentwiththesepurposes. While local government financial resources constitute a
relatively small portion of the total costsof providing housing, many cities take on a significant
administrative burden by providingfinancialincentivesandregulatoryrelief,participating instate
andregionalhousingprograms,and supporting either local or countywide housing and
redevelopment authorities and community developmentagencies.
When a developer seeks to advance a development proposal that does not meet straight housing
and mixed-use zoning codes and requirements, the developer may request a planned unit
development (PUD) agreement with a city. PUDs, where appropriate, can provide zoning
flexibility to develop a site that is otherwise not permitted by a city code.The use of PUDs may
allow for more variety and creativity in land uses, increased density on a site, internal transfers of
density, construction phasing, reduced setbacks, and a potential for lower development costs.
In the interest of adhering to local long-range plans and managing local health, safety, viability,
and welfare needs, a city may request certain public benefits from a developer, including but not
limited to additional open space, preservation of wooded land and environmentally sensitive areas,
2022 Legislative Policies
22
Housing & Economic Development
landscaping along major roadways,providing a mix of housing types,and enhanced design and
landscaping features. Cities may also provide a developer with credit for investments in public
infrastructure greater than would be minimally required, including water, sanitary sewer,
stormwater, or road infrastructure.
MetroCitiesstrongly opposesanyefforttoreduce,alterorinterferewithcitiesÓ authority
tocarryoutthesefunctionsinalocallydeterminedmanner.
Metro Cities supports exceptions to the land use timelines in M.S. 15.99 in the event of
extenuating local and state circumstances. Metro Cities supports local authority
determination when exercising the use of exceptions, recognizing projects may be in
different stages of approval. If a state of emergency limits the ability of city staff to
completealanduse review,itshouldnotresultindefactoapproval ofanapplication.
3-BCityRolein AffordableandLifeCycleHousing
MetroCitiessupportshousingthat isaffordableandappropriateforpeopleat all stagesof
life. A variety of housing opportunities are important to the economic and social well-being of
local communities and the metropolitan region. The region faces challenges in meeting the
existing andfuturehousingneedsoflow andmoderate-income residents.Existinghousing stock
isaging,with roughly half older than 40 years old, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Older
housingstock can be more affordable; however, it requires investments to remain viable.
Privateinvestors have purchased subsidized and unsubsidized rental units, made improvements,
andchargedhigherrentsthathavemadeaccesstopreviously affordable unitsprohibitivefor
lowandmoderate-income residents. The Metropolitan Council has projected the region will add
nearly35,000householdsbetween2021and2030thatwillneedaffordable housingandrequire
asubsidy of $5 billion to meet the needs of households earning up to 50 percent area median
income.
Cities should work with the private and nonprofit sectors, counties, state agencies and the
Metropolitan Council to ensure the best use of new and existing tools and resources to produce
new housing and preserve existing affordable housing. Cities can facilitate the production and
preservationofaffordableandlifecyclehousingby:
Applying forfundingfrom availablegrantand loan programs;
Using city and county funds to support affordable housing. This can include creating a
localorregionalhousingtrustfundtosupportaffordablehousing;
Providing information,encouragingparticipationand incentivizing participationinthe
Section8HousingChoice Voucherprogramtolandlords;
Working with developersandresidentsto blendaffordable housing intonewand existing
neighborhoods,includinglocations withaccess toamenities andservices;
Working withthestateand MetropolitanCounciltorecognizetherelationship between
2022 Legislative Policies
23
Housing & Economic Development
housingandmobilityoptions,includingtransitandpedestrianroutes;
Periodicallyexamininglocalrequirements,policiesandreviewprocessestodetermine
theirimpacts ontheconstructionofaffordablehousing;
Considering criteria underwhichacitymaychange itsfee structureinsupportof
additionalaffordablehousing;
Supportinghousing optionsthat meetacityÓscurrentand futuredemographics,including
familysize,age,mobility,andabilitylevels;
Supporting housing design that is flexible, accessible and usable for residents with varied
abilitiesatmultiplestages oflife;
Supportinghousingwithsupportiveservicesfor peoplewithdisabilities;
Employing innovative strategies to advance affordable housing needs such as public-
private partnershipsorcreative packagingofregulatoryreliefandincentives;
Usingavailableregulatorymechanismstoshapehousingcommunities;
Recognizingtheinventory ofsubsidizedandunsubsidized(naturallyoccurring)
affordable housing;and
Workingcollaborativelywith buyersandsellersofnaturallyoccurring affordablehousingto
retainaffordability.
3-CInclusionaryHousing
While Metro Cities believes there are cost savings to be achieved through regulatory reform,
density bonuses as determined by local communities, and fee waivers, Metro Cities does not
believe a mandatory inclusionary housing approach can achieve desired levels of affordability
solely through these steps. Several cities have established local inclusionary housing policies, in
some cases requiring the creation of affordable units if the housing development uses public
financial assistance or connecting the policy to zoning and land use changes. The Metropolitan
Council, in distributing the regional allocation of housing need, must recognize both the
opportunities and financial limitations of cities. The Council should partner with cities to
facilitatethecreationof affordablehousingthroughdirectfinancialassistanceand/oradvocating
foradditionalresourcesthroughtheMinnesota HousingFinance Agency.
Metro Citiessupportsthelocationofaffordablehousing inresidentialandmixed-use
neighborhoodsthroughoutacity.MetroCitiessupportsacityÓsauthoritytoenact itsown
inclusionary housing policy. However, Metro Cities does not support passage of a
mandatory inclusionary housing state law imposed on local governments that would
2022 Legislative Policies
24
Housing & Economic Development
require a certain percentage of units in all new housing developments to be affordable to
householdsatspecificincomelevels.
3-DMetropolitanCouncilRoleinHousing
The Metropolitan Council is statutorily required to assist cities with meeting the provisions of the
Land Use Planning Act (LUPA). The LUPA requires cities to adopt sufficient standards, plans
and programs to meet their local share of the regionÓs overall projected need for low and
moderate-income housing. The CouncilÓs responsibilities include the preparation and adoption of
guidelines and procedures to assist local government units with accomplishing the requirements
oftheLUPA.
The Metropolitan Council also offers programs and initiatives to create affordable housing
opportunities,includingtheLivableCommunitiesAct programsand operation ofametropolitan
housingandredevelopmentauthority.
Unlikeparks,transit andwastewater,housing isnot astatutoryregionalsystem.The
Metropolitan CouncilÓs role, responsibilities and authority are more limited in scope, centered on
assistinglocalgovernmentsbyidentifyingtheallocationofneedforaffordablehousing,
projectingregionalgrowthandidentifyingavailabletools,resources,technicalassistanceand
methods that cities can use to create and promote affordable housing opportunities in their
communities.
The Metropolitan Council should work in partnership with local governments to ensure that the
range of housing needs for people at various life cycles and incomes can be met. Metro Cities
opposes the elevation of housing to ÐRegional SystemÑ status. Metro Cities supports
removingtheMetropolitanCouncilÓsreviewandcommentauthorityconnectedto housing
revenue bonds underMinn.Stat.§462C.04.
In 2014, the Metropolitan Council released a housing policy plan, the first of its kind in nearly 30
years. A housing policy plan should include defined local, regional,and state roles for the
provisionofhousinginallsectors,identifytheavailabilityofandneedfortools andresources
for affordable and life-cycle housing, be explicit in supporting partnerships for the advocacy for
state and federal resources for housing, and encompass policies, best practices,and technical
guidance for all types of housing. A plan should also recognize the diversity in local needs,
characteristics,andresources.
Metro Cities supports strategies such as regional and sub-regional cooperation and the
sharing of best practices among local governments and other entities and partners to
addresstheregionÓsaffordable housingneeds.
A policy plan should allow for ongoing research and analysis by the Metropolitan Council to
providecommunitieswithtimelyandupdated informationonregionalandlocalhousingneeds
and market trends as regional and local needs change and evolve. Metro Cities supports the
solicitation and use of local data, inputs and analyses and local governmentsÓ review of
suchdata.
2022 Legislative Policies
25
Housing & Economic Development
MetroCitiessupportscontinuedcity representation inanyupdated ornewregional
housingpolicyplan.
3-EAllocationofAffordableHousingNeed
The affordable housing need allocation methodology determines the number of needed
affordablehousing unitsforthemetropolitanregion anddistributestheneedbyassigning each
city its fair share through an affordable housing need number. Minn. Stat. § 473.859 requires
cities to guide sufficient land to accommodate local shares of the regionÓs affordable housing
need. Metro Cities supports additional Metropolitan Council resources to assist cities in
meetingcitiesÓshare oftheregionÓsaffordablehousingneeds.
Metro Citiessupportsthe creationofavarietyofhousingopportunities.However,the
provisionof affordableandlifecyclehousingisasharedresponsibilitybetweentheprivatesector
andgovernmentatalllevels,includingthe federalgovernment,state governmentand
Metropolitan Council. Land economics, construction costs,and infrastructure needs create
barrierstothe creation ofaffordablehousingthat citiescannotovercomewithoutassistance.
Therefore,MetroCitiessupportsaMetropolitanCouncilaffordablehousingpolicy and
allocationofneedmethodologythatrecognizes the followingtenets:
Regional housing policies characterize individual city and sub-regional housing
numbers asarangeofneeds inthecommunity;
Cities need significant financial assistance from the federal and state government,as
well as the Metropolitan Council, to make progress toward creating additional
affordablehousingandpreservingexistingaffordablehousing;
MetropolitanCouncilplanningandpoliciesmustbemorecloselyalignedtohelp
ensurethatresources fortransportationandtransitareavailable to assistcommunities in
addressingtheirlocalshareoftheregionalaffordablehousingneedandtoensure
thatallpopulations have adequate mobility to reach jobs, education and other
destinationsregardless ofwheretheylive;
The Metropolitan Council will not hold cities responsible if a city does not meet its
affordable housing need number. However, efforts to produce affordable housing may
beconsideredwhenawardinggrants;
TheMetropolitanCouncil,withinputbylocal governmentrepresentatives, should
examine the allocation of need methodology with respect to the relationship between
theregional allocation and the local share of the need. The formula should also be
routinelyevaluatedtodetermineifmarketconditions havechangedorifunderlying
conditionsshouldpromptreadjustmentoftheformula;
2022 Legislative Policies
26
Housing & Economic Development
The Council should use a methodology that incorporates data accumulated by
individualcitiesand not limited tocensusdrivenorpolicydrivengrowth
projections;
Theformulashouldbeadjustedtobetterreflectthebalance andbreadthof
existingsubsidizedandnaturallyoccurringaffordablehousingstocks;and
The Council shouldworkwithlocalgovernmentsthroughanappealsprocessin
ordertoresolveanylocalissuesandconcernswithrespecttotheneedallocations.
3-FHousingPerformanceScores
The Metropolitan Council calculates a cityÓs housing performance score annually. Scores are
determinedusing an annual citysurvey aswell asCouncil data.TheCouncil usescity Housing
PerformanceScoreswhenscoring theRegionalSolicitation forfederaltransportationpoints.
Until 2020, the Council used Housing Performance Scores in Livable Communities grant
program scoring criteria. Cities may review their own as well as other citiesÓ Housing
PerformanceScoresperiodicallytogaugerecent activityonaffordablehousingpreservationand
newconstruction.
Metro Cities supports Housing Performance Score criteria that recognize varying local
resource capacities, tools, programs and policies to support housing production and the
market nature of housing development, and that do not limit cities to a prescriptive list of
toolsandpolicies.Thecriteriafor determining thescoreshouldadequately recognizethecurrent
tools,policiesandresourcesemployedbylocalgovernments.
Metro Cities supports a process for local governments to review, comment on and appeal
preliminary Housing Performance Scores as well as provide additional information to be
usedincalculatingthescores.
MetroCitiessupportsa consistentscheduleforsending theannualhousingproduction
surveytocities.
In considering HousingPerformanceScore usesand criteria:
TheCouncilshould engage ina periodicreviewoftheformula;
Anyproposednew,deleted,orexpanded usesorprogramsinwhichthe Housing
PerformanceScoreswouldbeusedshouldbereviewedbylocalofficials andMetroCities;
and
TheCouncilshouldrecognize marketfactorssuchas downwardeconomiccycleswhen
setting timelines andlook-backsincalculatingrecentaffordablehousingproduction.
2022 Legislative Policies
27
Housing & Economic Development
3-GStateRoleinHousing
The state mustbe anactive participantinprovidingfundingforhousing,includingdirect
funding,financial incentives,and initiativesto assistlocal governmentsanddevelopersto
support affordablehousing and housing appropriate for people at all stages of life. State funding
is amajor and necessary component for the provision of housing. Current resource levels are
insufficient tomeetthe spectrumofneedsinthe metropolitan regionandacrossthe state.
PrimarilythroughprogramsadministeredbytheMinnesotaHousingFinanceAgency (MHFA),
the state establishes the general direction and prioritization of housing issues, and financially
supports a variety of housing, including transitional housing, privately and publicly owned
housing,supportive housing,seniorhousing,workforce housing,andfamilyhousing.
MinnesotaÓs low-income rental property classification, commonly known as class 4d, allows
landlords to certify qualifying low-income rental property. The state must continue to be an
active partnerinaddressinglife cycleandaffordablehousingneeds.
Workforcehousingisgenerallydefined ashousingthatsupportseconomicdevelopmentandjob
growth and is affordable to the local workforce. A statewide program, administered through the
MinnesotaHousingFinance Agency,supportsworkforcehomeownershipeffortsinthe
metropolitanarea.State policiesand fundingshouldrecognizethat affordable housingoptions
that are accessible to jobsandmeet theneedsofacityÓsworkforceare importanttothe
economic competitiveness of cities and the metro region. In addition, significant housing related
racialdisparities persist in Minnesota, especially as it relates to the percentage of households of
colorwho pay more than 30 percent of their income in housing costs and as it relates to the
significantdisparitygapinhomeownershiprates.
MetroCitiessupports:
Increased,sustainableandadequatestatefundingfornewandexistingprogramsthat
supportlifecycle,workforceandaffordablehousing,addresshomeownership
disparities,addressforeclosuremitigation,addresshousingfor familieswithchildren,
andsupportsenior,transitionalandemergencyhousingforthemetroregion;
A state match for local and regional housing trust fund investments and local
policies in support of affordable housing. State funds should be issued on a timeline
thatworkswithacityÓs budgetprocess;
Privatesectorfundingforworkforcehousing;
Housing programs that assist housing development, preservation and maintenanceof
existing housing stock, including unsubsidized, naturally occurring affordable housing
thatis affordabletoresidents throughoutthelow-to-moderateincomerange;
State funded housing programs, including housing assistance, to help with
affordability;
Housing programs designed to develop market rate housing in census blocks with
emergingor highconcentrationsofpoverty,where the privatemarketmightnot
2022 Legislative Policies
28
Housing & Economic Development
otherwiseinvest, as a means of creating mixed-income communities and reconciling
affordablehousingwithcommunitydevelopmentgoals;
ContinuingthepolicyofusingtheMinnesota Housing FinanceAgencyÓsinvestment
earnings for housingprograms;
City input into state legislation and administrative policies regarding distribution oftax
credits andtax-exemptbonding;
Exemptions from, or reductions to sales, use and transaction taxes applied to the
developmentandproductionofaffordablehousing;
Considerationoftheuseofstatebondproceedsandotherappropriationsforland
banking,landtrusts,andrehabilitationandconstructionofaffordablehousing;
Programs that help avoid foreclosures, improve homeownership rates and reduce
racialdisparitiesthroughhomeownershipassistanceprograms andcounseling
services,includingpre-purchasingcounselingtoimprovefinancialwellnessandinform
homeownerandpotentialhomeownersoftheirrights,options,andcostsassociated
withowninga home;
StatetenantprotectionpoliciesaswellasacityÓsabilitytoenacttenantprotectionsto
supportaccess toaffordablehousingandhousingstabilityfortenants;
Housing stabilityforrentersthroughpoliciesthatmitigatethe impactofor reducesthe
numberofevictionsfiled;
Policies that encourage public housing authorities and owners of federally assisted
housingtoconsideraholisticapproachtoselectingtenants duringtheapplication
andscreeningprocess,andavoidexcludingtenantssolelybasedoncriminalrecords;
Exploringbestpractices towardincreasedhousingaffordabilityforresidents,housing
maintenance standards and providing quality housing for residents. Cities should
workwithrentalhousingowners andoperators whenestablishingbestpractices;
Preservingthestate4dlow-incomepropertytaxprogramwhichprovides aproperty
tax benefit to qualifying low-income rental properties. Metro Cities supports
evaluating the 4d low-income property tax program to determine how program
changescouldaffectrenters,landlords andpropertytaxpayers.Studiesshouldinclude
participation and input from metropolitan local government representatives. Metro
Citiesopposes any changes to the 4d program that substantially increases the tax
responsibilityfor residents and businesses or increases the tax benefit for landlords
without includingincreasedbenefits forrenters of4dunits includingbutnotlimitedto
deeperaffordabilityor property reinvestment. Metro Cities supports the
implementation of a reporting processfor landlords and a sunset period for any
changes made to the program to evaluate therangeofimpactsthatexpandingthe
programmayhave;
2022 Legislative Policies
29
Housing & Economic Development
An affordable housing tax credit to help spur construction and secure additional
privateinvestment.Thisincentivecouldbeusedinconjunctionwithcity,regional,or
otherstateincentives;and
Maintaining existing municipal authority to establish a housing improvement area
(HIA). If the Legislature grants multi-jurisdictional entities the authority to create
HIAs,creationofanHIAmustrequiremunicipalapproval.
3-HFederalRoleinAffordableandWorkforceHousing
Federal funding plays a critical role in aiding states and local governments in their efforts to
maintainandincreaseaffordableandworkforcehousing.Providingworkingfamiliesaccessto
housingis animportantpiecetothe economicvitalityoftheregion.
Metro Cities encourages the federal government to maintain and increase current levels of
fundingfor affordableandworkforcehousing.Federalinvestmentinaffordableandworkforce
housing will maintain andincrease thesupply ofaffordableandlifecyclehousing aswellas
makehousingmoreaffordablethroughrental assistanceprogramssuch astheSection 8housing
choicevoucherprogram.
In July 2015, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) released a final
rule on affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH) with an aim to provide communities that
receiveHUDfundingwith clear guidelinestomeettheir obligation undertheFair Housing Act
of 1968 to promote and reduce barriers to fair housing and equal opportunity. HUD has since
provided newguidancetocomplywiththeAFFHrule.
Opportunity Zones is a community development program established by Congress in the Tax
Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 to encourage long-term investments in low-income urban and rural
communities nationwide. The Opportunity Zones program provides a tax incentive for investors
to re-invest their unrealized capital gains into Opportunity Funds that are dedicated to investing
intoOpportunityZones.Thetaxincentiveisavailableforuptotenyears.
128 census tracts were designatedas Opportunity Zones in 2018. The United States Treasury
released rules on April 17, 2019 which provide guidance and clarification for investors and fund
managers. It is anticipated that the Act may be a useful tool in spurring development in low-
income communities and could help with business development and jobs. There are also
questions about what impact the Act will have on the residents that live and businesses that
operate in these communities today. For example, while development may have positive impacts
such as increasing tax base or job opportunities, robust development could have unintended
consequencessuchasdisplacementofcurrentresidents andbusinesses.
Metro Cities urges the federal government to seek regular input from communities, especially
fromindividualsand businesseswithin Opportunity Zones,regardinghowthetoolisbeing used,
whether the tool is encouraging new development opportunities, and how community members
2022 Legislative Policies
30
Housing & Economic Development
who liveintheZones areimpacted.
TheStateof Minnesotashouldutilizecommunitydevelopmentresourcestostimulateinvestment
in Opportunity Zones and adopt policies that ensure that local residents, workers and businesses
benefitfromtheinvestments.
MetroCitiessupports:
Preserving and increasing funding for the Community Development Block Grant
Program (CDBG) and the federal HOME program that are catalysts for creating
andpreservingaffordablehousing;
Preservingandincreasingresourcesandincentivestosustainexistingpublic
housingthroughouttheMetroArea;
Maintaining the federal tax credit program to help spur construction and secure
additional private investment, including making the four percent Low Income Housing
TaxCreditafixedrateas wasdone withthenine percentcreditin2015;
Creating and implementing a more streamlined procedural method for local units of
government to participate in and access federal funding and services dealing with
grants,loans,andtaxincentiveprogramsfor economicandcommunitydevelopment
efforts;
Additionalresourcesto assistcommunitiestomeetobligationstoreducebarriersto
andpromotefairhousingandequalopportunity;
Maintaining and increasing resources to Section 8 funding and to support incentivesfor
rentalpropertyowners toparticipateintheprogram;and
Federal funding to provide short-term assistance for HRAs to facilitate the sale of
tax-exemptbonds.
3-IVacant,Boarded,andForeclosedPropertiesandPropertiesatRisk
Abandoned residentialandcommercial propertiescan harmcommunitieswhen vacantbuildings
result in reduced property values and increased crime. The additional public safety and code
enforcementcostsofmanagingvacantpropertiesare a financialstrainoncities.
MetroCitiessupportssolutionsto vacant andboardedpropertiesthat recognize:
Prevention ismorecosteffectivethan acure;
The causes of this problem are many and varied, thus the solutions must be as well;
and
2022 Legislative Policies
31
Housing & Economic Development
It is not simply a ÐcityÑ problem so cities must not be expected to bear the bulk ofthe
burdenofmitigation.
Further,MetroCitiessupports:
Registration ofvacantandboardedproperties;
Allowing cities to acquire vacant and boarded properties before deterioration and
vandalism result in unsalvageable structures, including providing financial tools
such asincreasingeminentdomainflexibility;
Improving the ability of cities to recoup the increased public safety, management,
andenforcementcosts relatedtovacantproperties;
Improvement of the redemption process to provide increased notification to renters,
strengthen the ability of homeowners to retain their properties, and reduce the amount
oftime apropertyisvacant;
Expeditionofthetaxforfeitureprocess;
Increasing financial tools for neighborhood recovery efforts, including tax
incrementfinancing;and
Year-round notification by utility companies of properties not receiving utility
service.
3-JHousingOrdinanceEnforcement
A Minnesota State Supreme Court ruling, Morris v. Sax, stated that provisions of the city of
MorrisÓ rental housingcodewereinvalidbecausethereweresubjectsdealt withunderthestate
building code and the city was attempting to regulate these areas Ðdifferently from the state
buildingcode.Ñ
Minn. Stat. £ 326B.121, subdivision 1 states: ÐThe State Building Code is the standard that
applies statewide for the construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair,and use of buildings and
other structures of the type governed by the code. The State Building Code supersedes the
building code of any municipality.Ñ Subdivision 2 states: ÐA municipality must not by ordinance,
or through development agreement, require building code provisions regulating components or
systems of any structure that are different from any provision of the State Building Code. This
subdivision does not prohibit a municipality from enacting or enforcing an ordinance requiring
existing components or systems of any structure to be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition
or in good repair, but not exceeding the standards under which the structure was built,
reconstructed, or altered, or the component or system was installed, unless specific retroactive
provisions for existing buildings have been adopted as part of the State Building Code. A
municipality may,with theapprovalofthestatebuilding official,adopt an ordinancethatismore
restrictive than the State Building Code where geological conditions warrant a more restrictive
2022 Legislative Policies
32
Housing & Economic Development
ordinance. A municipality may appeal the disapproval of a more restrictive ordinance to the
commissioner.Ñ
MetroCitiessupportstheability of citiestoenforceallhousing codespassed bya local
municipalityto maintainits housingstock.
3-KEconomicDevelopment,RedevelopmentandWorkforceReadiness
The economic viability of the metropolitanarea is enhanced by anarray of economic
developmenttools that create infrastructure, revitalize previously developed property, provide
incentives forbusiness development, support technological advances, support a trained
workforce, and addressdisparities in economic development and workforce development. It
should be the goal of thestate to champion development and redevelopment by providing
adequate and sustainable funding toassure competitiveness in a global marketplace. The state
should recognize the relationshipbetweenhousing andeconomicdevelopment.Access to
affordable childcare supports working families and allows parents to enter or remain in the
workforce. Economicdevelopment andredevelopmentarenot mutuallyexclusive Îsome
projects require a boost on both counts. TheState of Minnesotashould recognizecitiesasthe
primaryunitofgovernmentresponsible forthe implementationof economic development,
redevelopment policies, and land use controls.
3-K(1)EconomicDevelopment
For purposes of this section, economic development is defined as a form of development that can
containdirectbusiness assistance,infrastructuredevelopment,technicalassistance,andpolicy
supportwiththegoalofsustainablejobcreation,jobretention, appropriatestateregulationor
classification, or to nurture new or retain existing industry in the state. The measure of return on
investmentofpublicbusiness subsidies shouldincludetheimpact(positiveornegative)of
Ðspin-off developmentÑ or business development that is ancillary and supportive of the primary
business.
A strengthoftheregionaleconomyisits economicdiversity.Multipleindustryclustersand
sectors employaspecialized,trainedworkforceandsupportentrepreneurs indevelopingnew
businesses.Partnershipsandcollaborationsamongthe state andlocallevelsofgovernment,
highereducationandindustryshouldcontinuetodevelop,tocommercialize newtechnologies
andtosupporteffortstoenhance theeconomicvitalityoftheregion.
Whilecitiesaretheunitoflocalgovernmentprimarily responsiblefortheimplementationof
economicdevelopment,counties haveaninterestinsupportinglocaleconomicdevelopment
efforts.AnycreationofacountyCDA,EDAorHRAwitheconomicdevelopmentpowers
should follow Minn. Stat. § 469.1082 that requires a city to adopt a resolution electing to
participate. Cities can work with the public and private sectors to support the regionÓs economic
growthbyreducingbarriers toeconomicparticipationbypeopleofcolor.
Metro Cities supports state funded programs that support new and expanding businesses,
infrastructure developmentandpublic-privatepartnerships.Thisincludes theMinnesota
InvestmentFund,JobCreationFundandAngelTaxCredit.Programs usingstatewidefunding
shouldstrivetoawardfunds balancedbetweenthemetroregionandgreaterMinnesota.Metro
2022 Legislative Policies
33
Housing & Economic Development
Cities supports competitive funding for statewide grant programs such as the Minnesota
InvestmentFund(MIF)as opposedtodirectlegislativeappropriations forprojects from
these funds. Metro Cities supports a percentage of MIF loan repayments to cities. The state
shouldprovide administrative supportandtechnicalassistance tocitiesthatadministerthese
programs. Applications for state MIF funds should allow a city to indicate support for a MIF
grantor a loan.
MetroCitiessupports economictools thatfacilitatejobgrowthwithoutrelyingsolelyon
the propertytaxbase;greenjobdevelopmentandrelatedinnovationand
entrepreneurship;programs tosupportminoritybusiness start-ups;smallbusiness
financingtoolsincludingastatenew marketstaxcreditprogrammirroredonthefederal
program; tools to attract and retain data centers and other IT facilities; access to
affordable child care; and maintainingexistingmunicipalauthoritytoestablishaspecial
service district(SSD).MetroCitiessupportsfurtherstudyofallowingmixed-usebuildings
thathavebothcommercialandresidentialusestobeincludedinanSSD.
3-K(2)Redevelopment
Redevelopmentinvolves thedevelopmentoflandthatrequires Ðpredevelopment.ÑThegoalof
redevelopmentis tofacilitatethedevelopmentofÐpre-usedÑland,therebylevelingtheplaying
fieldbetweengreenfieldandbrownfieldsites sothataprivatesectorentitycanrationallychoose
to locate on land that has already been used. The benefits of redevelopment include a decrease in
Vehicle Miles Traveled(VMTs),moreefficientuseofneworexistingpublicinfrastructure
(includingpublictransit),amelioratedcitycosts duetopublicsafetyandcodeenforcement,and
otherpublicgoodsthatresultwhenlandisreusedratherthanabandonedandcompact
developmentis encouraged.
MetroCitiessupports increasedfundingfromstateandregionalsources.TheMetropolitan
CouncilÓs Livable Communities Act programs fund redevelopment activities that support
cleanupandtaxbaserevitalization.MetroCitiessupports allowingamaximumlevyamount
for this program, as provided under law. Metro Cities supports increased and sustained
state funds for DEED-administered programs like the Redevelopment Grant Programand
DemolitionLoanProgram,dedicatedtometropolitanareaprojects,innovativeBusiness
DevelopmentPublicInfrastructuregrants,as wellas increased,flexibleandsustained
fundingfortheContaminationCleanupandInvestigationGrantProgram.
The expansion of transit service throughout the region brings opportunity for redevelopment and
transit-oriented development(TOD).MetroCitiessupports financing, regulatorytools and
increasedflexibilityintheuseofTaxIncrementFinancing(TIF)tonurtureTOD.Metro
Citiessupports fundingTransitImprovementAreas (TIAs)andensuringthatthe
eligibilitycriteriaencourage arangeofimprovements andinfrastructureand
accommodatevaryingcitycircumstances andneeds.
Correcting and stabilizing polluted soils and former landfill sites allows cities to redevelop and
reuse properties.MetroCitiessupports expansionofexistingtools ordevelopmentofnew
funding mechanisms to correct unsuitable soils as well as city authority to redevelop land
2022 Legislative Policies
34
Housing & Economic Development
previously used as landfills and dumps. If a city receives initial approval from a state
regulatoryauthority, acityÓsredevelopmentprojectapprovalshouldbeconsideredfinal.
Localgovernments andcitiesmaychoose torevitalize historicstructures ratherthanconstruct
new buildings.MetroCitiessupports extensionofthesunsetofthestateincometaxcredit
and maintaining the federal tax credit for preservation of historic properties. Metro Cities
supportscollectionofthestaterefundforthehistoricexpenditures overoneyear.
Metro Citiessupportsstatefundingtoallowcitiesand/or theirdevelopmentauthoritiesto
assemble smallpropertiessothatbusiness expansionsites willbereadyforfuture
redevelopment.
3-K(3)WorkforceReadiness
A trained workforce is important to a strong local, regional,and state economy. Cities have an
interest in the availability of qualified workers and building a future workforce based on current
and futuredemographics,aspartoftheireconomicdevelopment efforts.Citiescan workwiththe
public and private sectors to address workforce readiness to include removing barriers to
education access,addressing racialdisparitiesinachievement andemploymentgaps,addressing
the occupational gender gap, and support training and jobs for people with disabilities. The state
has a role to prepare and train a qualified workforce throughthe secondary, vocational,and
higher education systems and job training and retraining programsin the Department of
Employment and Economic Development (DEED), including youthemploymentprograms.
MetroCitiessupports:
Increased funding for the Job Skills Partnership, youth employment programs and
other workforce training programs administered by the state that lead to jobs that
providealivingwageandbenefits,support workers of all abilities, andhelpaddress
racialdisparitygapsinemployment;
Innovative workforceprograms andpartnerships thatfosterworkforcereadiness
for a full range of jobs and careers, including skilled municipal jobs and current
highopportunityareas suchas manufacturingandconstruction;
Investmentsinprogramsthataddressthegender wagegap,includingtrainingfor
womentoenternontraditionalcareers;
Apayroll tax creditforjobtrainingprogramsthat investin employees;and
A cityÓsauthoritytotieworkforce requirementstolocalpublicfinanceassistance.
3-LTaxIncrementFinancing(TIF)
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) continues to be the primary tool available for local communities
to assist economic development, redevelopment,and housing. Over time, statutory changes have
2022 Legislative Policies
35
Housing & Economic Development
made this critical tool increasingly difficult to use. At the same time, federal and state
development and redevelopment resources have been steadily shrinking. The cumulative impact
of TIF restrictions, shrinking federal and state redevelopment resources and highly restrictive
eminent domain laws constrain citiesÓ abilities to address problem properties, which leads to an
acceleratedlevel ofdeclineofdevelopedcitiesinthemetropolitan area.Thus,theonly source of
revenueavailableto accomplishthescopeofredevelopment necessary isthevaluecreatedby the
redevelopment itself, or the Ðincrement.Ñ Without the use of the increment, development will
eithernotoccuroris unlikelytobeoptimal.
Metro CitiesurgestheLegislatureto:
Not adopt anystatutory languagethatwouldfurtherconstrain ordirectly or
indirectlyreducetheeffectiveness ofTIF;
Notadoptanystatutorylanguagethatwouldallowacounty,schooldistrictor
specialtaxingdistricttooptoutofaTIF district;
Incorporate the Soils Correction District criteria into the Redevelopment District
criteriasothataRedevelopment Districtcanbecomprisedofblightedand
contaminatedparcelsinadditiontorailroadproperty;
ExpandtheflexibilityofTIF tosupport abroaderrangeofredevelopmentprojects;
AmendMNStatutestoclarifythattaxincrementpoolinglimitationsarecalculatedon
acumulativebasis;
Increasetheabilitytopoolincrementsfromotherdistricts tosupportprojects;
ContinuetomonitortheimpactsoftaxreformonTIFdistricts andif warranted
provide citieswithadditionalauthoritytopayforpossible TIFshortfalls;
Allow for the creation of transit zones and transit-related TIF districts in order toshape
development and related improvements around transit stations but not require theuse
of TIF districts to fund the construction or maintenance of the public transit line itself
unlessalocalcommunitychoosestodoso;
AllowTIF eligibilityexpansiontoinnovativetechnologicalproducts,recognizing
thatnotonlyphysicalitems createeconomicvalue;
Support changes to TIF law that will facilitate the development of Ðregional
projectsÑ;
Shift TIF redevelopment policy away from a focus on ÐblightÑ and ÐsubstandardÑto
Ðfunctionally obsoleteÑ or a focus on long range planning for a particular community,
reductioningreenhouse gasesor other criteriamore relevanttocurrentneeds;
Encourage DEED to do an extensive cost-benefit analysis related to redevelopment,
including ananalysisofthevariousfundingmechanisms,andan analysisof wherethe
2022 Legislative Policies
36
Housing & Economic Development
costburden falls with each of the options compared to the distribution of the benefits
of theredevelopment project;
SupportTIFforneighborhood recoveryeffortsinthewakeoftheforeclosurecrisis;
Consider creating an inter-disciplinary TIF team to review local exception TIF
proposals,usingestablishedcriteria,andmakerecommendations tothelegislatureon
theirpassage;
Encourage the State Auditor to continue to work toward a more efficient and
streamlined reporting process. There are an increasing number of noncompliance
noticesthat have overturned longstanding practices or limited statutorily defined
terms. TheLegislature has not granted TIF rulemaking authority to the State Auditor and
the audit powersgrantedby statutearenot anappropriate vehicleformakingadministrative
orlegislativechangesto TIF statutes. If the State Auditor is to exercise rulemaking authority,
the administrative powerto do so must be granted explicitly by the Legislature. The audit
enforcement process does notcreate a level playing field for cities to challenge the AuditorÓs
interpretation of statutes. TheLegislature should provide a process through which to resolve
disputes over TIF policy that isfairtoallparties;
Clarifytheuse ofTIFwhenasale occursafterthe closingofadistrict;
Revisethesubstandardbuildingtesttosimplify,resolveambiguitiesandreduce
continuedthreatoflitigation;and
Amend TIF statutes to address, through extending districts or other mechanisms,
shortfallsrelatedtodecliningmarketvalues.
Metro Cities supports statutory modifications to TIF statutes to provide temporary
flexibility for municipalities in the use of unobligated TIF increment as cities address
localrevenue challenges resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Metro Cities opposes
changestoTIFlawsthatwouldmandatetheforgivenessofloansbyaTIFauthoritytoa
business.
3-MEminentDomain
Significant statutory restrictions on the use of eminent domain have resulted in higher public
costs for traditional public use projects like streets, parks, and sewers, and have all but restricted
theuse ofeminentdomainforredevelopmenttocasesofextreme blightorcontamination.
The proper operation and long-term economic vitality of our cities is dependent on the ability of
a city, its citizens,and its businesses to continually reinvest and reinvent. Reinvestment and
reinvention strategies can occasionally conflict with the priorities of individual residents or
business owners. Eminent domain is a critical tool in the reinvestment and reinvention process
and withoutitourcitiesmay deteriorate tounprecedented levelsbefore the public reacts.
2022 Legislative Policies
37
Housing & Economic Development
MetroCitiesstrongly encouragestheGovernorand Legislatureto revisit eminentdomain lawsto
allow local governments to address redevelopment problems before those conditions become
financiallyimpossibletoaddress.
Specifically,MetroCitiessupports:
Clarifyingcontaminationstandards;
Developingdifferent standardsforredevelopmenttoincludeobsoletestructuresorto
reflectthe deteriorationconditionsthatcurrentlyexistinthemetroarea;
Allowingfortheassemblyofmultipleparcelsforredevelopmentprojects;
Modifying the public purpose definition under Minn. Stat. 117 to allow cities tomore
expedientlyaddresspropertiesthatarevacant orabandonedinareaswith high levelsof
foreclosures,aswellasaddress neighborhoodstabilizationandrecovery;
Providing the ability to acquire land from ÐholdoutsÑ who will now view apublicly
funded project as an opportunity for personal gain at taxpayer expense; i.e. allowfor
negotiationusingbalancedappraisalsforfairrelocationcosts;
Examiningattorneyfeesandlimit fees forattorneys representingapropertyowner;
Allowing for relocation costs not to be paid if the city and property owner agree to a
salecontract;
A property ownerÓs appraisal to be shared with the city prior to a sale agreement;
and
Appropriately balanced awardsofattorneyfeesand costsoflitigationwiththe
outcome oftheeminentdomainproceeding.
3-NCommunityReinvestment
Communitiesacrossthe metropolitanregionhaveagingresidential and commercialstructures
that need repair and reinvestment. Reinvestment prevents neighborhoods from falling into
disrepair,revitalizescommunitiesandprotectsacityÓstax base.
Metro Citiessupportsstateprogramsandincentivesforreinvestmentinolderresidential
and commercial/industrial buildings, such as, but not limited to, tax credits and/or
propertytaxdeferrals.
Historically, thestatehasfundedprogramstopromotereinvestmentincommunities,including
theÐThisOld HouseÑprogram,that allowed ownersofolderhomestead propertytodeferan
increase in their tax capacity resulting from repairs or improvements to the home and ÐThis Old
ShopÑ for owners of older commercial/industrial property that make improvements that increase
2022 Legislative Policies
38
Housing & Economic Development
thepropertyÓsmarketvalue.
3-OBusinessIncentivesPolicy
Without a thorough study, the Legislature should not make any substantive changes to the
Business Subsidy Act, as defined in Minn. Stat. § 116J.993, but should look to technical changes
that would streamline both state and local processes and procedures. The Legislature should
distinguishbetweendevelopmentincentivesandredevelopmentactivities.Inaddition,inorderto
ensure cohesive and comprehensive regulations, the legislature should limit regulation of
businessincentives totheBusinessSubsidyAct.
Metro Cities supports additional legislation that includes tools to help enhance and
facilitate economic development and job creation. Metro Cities supports increased
flexibilityformeetingbusinesssubsidyagreementsduringastateofemergency.
3-PBroadbandTechnology
Where many traditional economic development tools have focused on managing the costs and
st
availability of traditional infrastructure -roads, rail,and utilities -the 21century economy is
dependenton reliable,costeffective,highbandwidthcommunicationscapabilities.Thisincludes
voice, video, data,and other services delivered over cable, telephone, fiber-optic, wireless,and
otherplatforms.
The state has increased its role in expanding broadband infrastructureacross the state by funding
broadband access for residents and businesses. The GovernorÓs Broadband Task Force regularly
recommends updates to state broadband speed goals and funding levels to expand statewide
broadband access. The Office of Broadband Development in the Department of Employment and
Economic Development (DEED) supports the role of broadband in economic development. The
Officecoordinatesbroadbandmappingandadministersstate broadbandgrantfunds.
Cities play a vital role in achieving significantly higher broadband speeds. Local units of
governmentarecontributingtoincreasingbroadbandcapacityandensuringinternetconnectivity,
reliability, and availability. However, attempts have been made in Minnesota and other states to
restrict orstopcitiesfromfacilitatingthe deployment ofbroadbandservicesorforming
partnershipswithprivate sectorcompaniestoprovide broadbandservicestounservedor
underserved residents or businesses. Restricting municipal authority is contrary to existing state
law on electric utility service, telecommunications, and economic development. Metro Cities
opposes the adoption of state policies that further restrict a cityÓs ability to finance,
constructoroperatebroadbandtelecommunicationsnetworks.
MetroCitiessupports:
State policies and support programs that substantially increase speed and capacityof
broadbandservicesstatewide, includingfacilitatingsolutionsatthelocallevel. The
stateshould offer incentives to private sector service providers to respond to local or
regionalneeds and to collaborate with cities and other public entities to deploy
broadbandinfrastructure capable of delivering sufficient bandwidth and capacity to
2022 Legislative Policies
39
Housing & Economic Development
meet immediateand future localneedsaswellaspolicieswhichseektoposition
Minnesotaasastateofchoicefor testingnext-generationbroadband;
Metroeligibilityforbroadbandfunds,including increasedcapacity forareaswith
existinglevels ofservice;
Testing and review of street-level broadband speeds and updating of comprehensive
statewide street-level mapping of broadband services to identify underserved areas and
connectivityissues.
Programs and projects that improve broadband adoption, achieve significantlyhigher
broadband speeds, and support efforts to improve digital inclusion by ensuring that
robustandaffordableInternetconnectivityiswidely availableto allMinnesotans.
Municipalauthorityandencouragementoflocalgovernmentstoplayadirect rolein
providing broadband service. This includes repealing Minn. Stat. § 237.19. The state
should clarify that cities have the authority to partner with private entities to finance
broadbandinfrastructureusingcitybondingauthority;
Local authority to manage and protect public rights-of-way including public and
private infrastructure, to zone, to collect compensation for the use of public assets, or to
work cooperatively with and respond to applications from the private sector. Cities
mayexercise local authority over zoning and land-use decisions for siting, upgrading, or
alteringwireless service facilities and exercise regulations of structures in the public
right-of-way;and
Public-private collaborations that support broadband infrastructure and services atthe
local and regional level, including partnerships and cooperation in providing last-mile
connections.
3-QCityRoleinEnvironmentalProtectionandSustainableDevelopment
Historically, cities have played a major role in environmental protection, particularly in water
quality. Through the construction and operation of wastewater treatment and storm water
management systems, cities are a leader in protecting the surface water of the state. In recent
years,increasedemphasishasbeenplacedonprotectinggroundwaterandremoving
impairmentsfromstormwater.Inaddition,there isincreased emphasison cityparticipationin
controllingourcarbonfootprintandinpromotinggreendevelopment.
Metro Cities supports public and private environmental protection efforts to reduce
greenhousegasemissionsandtofurtherprotectsurfaceandground water.MetroCities
also supports ÐgreenÑ design and construction techniques to the extent that those
techniques have been thoroughly tested and are truly environmentally beneficial,
economically sustainable and represent sound building practices. Metro Cities supports
additional, feasible environmental protection with adequate funding and incentives to
comply.MetroCitiessupportsstatefundingformunicipalrenewableenergyobjectives.
2022 Legislative Policies
40
Housing & Economic Development
Green jobs represent employment and entrepreneurial opportunities that are part of the green
economy, as defined in Minn. Stat. § 116J.437, including the four industry sectors of green
products, renewable energy, green services and environmental conservation. MinnesotaÓs green
jobs policies, strategies and investments need to lead to high quality jobs with good wages and
benefits,meetingcurrentwageandlaborlaws.
3-RImpairedWaters
Local units of government should not bear undue cost burdens associated with completed TMDL
reports.AsrecentTotal Maximum Daily Load (TMDL)reportsshow,non-pointagricultural
sourcesareproducingmorerunoffpollution than urban areas at a rate of 13:1. Cities must not be
required as primary entities forfunding theclean-upand protectionofstate and regionalwater
resources.Benefitsofeffortsmust be proportional to the costs incurred and agricultural sources
must be held responsible fortheirshareofcosts.
Metro Cities supports continued development of the metropolitan area in a manner that is
responsive to the market but is cognizant of the need to protect the water resources of the
state and metro area. Since all types of properties are required to pay storm water fees,
Metro Cities opposes entity-specific exemptions from these fees. Metro Cities supports the
goalsoftheClean WaterActand effortsatboththefederal andstatelevel toimplementit.
Metro Cities supports continued funding of the framework established to improve the
regionÓs ability to respond to market demands for development and redevelopment,
includingdedicatedfundingforsurfacewaterimpairmentassessments, TMDL
development, storm water construction grants and wastewaterconstructiongrants.
2022 Legislative Policies
41
Metropolitan Agencies
4-AGoalsandPrinciplesforRegionalGovernance
The Twin Cities metropolitan region is home to a majority of the stateÓs population and
businesses and is poised for significant growth in the next two decades. The region faces both
significantchallengesandopportunities,theresponses towhichwilldeterminethefuture
successofthemetropolitanregionandits competitiveness inthestate,nationalandworld
economies.
The Metropolitan Council was created to manage the growth of the metropolitan region, andcities
are responsible for adhering to regional plans as they plan for local growth and servicedelivery.
The regionÓs cities are the Metropolitan CouncilÓs primary constituency, with regional and local
growthbeingprimarilymanagedthroughcitycomprehensiveplanningandimplementationand
thedeliveryofpublicservices.Tofunctionsuccessfully,theMetropolitanCouncilmustbe
accountable toandworkincollaborationwithcitygovernments.
Theroleofthe MetropolitanCouncilis tosetbroadregionalgoals andtoprovidecitieswith
technical assistance andincentivestoachievethese goals.Citygovernmentsare responsible and
bestsuitedtoprovidelocalzoning,landuseplanning,developmentandservice delivery.Any
additionalrolesorresponsibilities fortheMetropolitanCouncilshouldbelimitedtospecific
statutoryassignments orgrants orauthorizationandshouldnotusurporconflictwithlocalroles
orprocesses,unless suchchanges have theconsentoftheregionÓs cities.
Metro Cities supports an economically strong and vibrant region, and the effective,
efficientandequitableprovisionofregionalinfrastructure,services andplanning
throughoutthemetropolitanarea.
Metro Cities supports the provision of approved regional systems and planning that can be
provided more effectively, efficiently or equitably on a regional level than at the local level
byindividuallocalunitsofgovernment.
The Metropolitan Council must involve cities in the delivery of regional services and planning
andberesponsive tolocalperspectives onregionalissues andberequiredtoprovide
opportunities forcityparticipationonCounciladvisorycommittees andtaskforces.
The Metropolitan Council must involve cities at all steps of planning, review and
implementation oftheregionaldevelopmentguide,policyplans,systems statements,andlocal
comprehensive planrequirements toensuretransparency,balanceandCounciladherence toits
coremissionand functions.Theseprocesses shouldallowforstakeholderinputbeforepolicies
and plans are released for comment and finalized. Any additional functions for the Metropolitan
Council shouldnotbeundertakenunlessauthorizedspecificallybystatelaw.
2022 Legislative Policies
42
Metropolitan Agencies
4-BRegionalGovernanceStructure
MetroCitiessupportstheappointment ofMetropolitanCouncilmembersbytheGovernor
with four-year, staggered terms for members to stabilize ideological shifts and provide for
continuity of knowledge on the Council, which is appropriate for a long-range planning
body. The appointment of the Metropolitan Council Chair should coincide with the term of the
Governor.
Metro Cities supports a nominating committee process that maximizes participation and
input by local officials. Metro Cities supports expanding the nominating committee from
seven to 13 members, with a majority of a 13-member committee being local elected
officials.Ofthelocal officialsappointedtoanominating committee,two thirdsshould beelected
cityofficials,appointedbyMetroCities.
Considerationshouldbegiventothecreationoffour separatenominating committees,with
committeerepresentationfromeachquadrantofthe region.
Metro Cities supports having the names of recommended nominees or other individuals
under consideration for appointment to the Council by the Governor to be made public at
least21dayspriortofinalselectionbytheGovernor,andaformalpublic commentperiod
before members areappointedtotheCouncil.
Metro Cities supports the appointment of Metropolitan Council members who have
demonstratedtheability toworkwith citiesin a collaborativemanner,committomeet
with local government officials regularly and who are responsive to the circumstances and
concerns of cities in the district that they represent on the Council. Council members should
understand the diversity and the commonalities of the region, and the long-term implications of
regionaldecision-making. A detailed position description outlining the required skills, time
commitment and understanding of regional and local issues and concerns should be clearly
articulatedandpostedinadvanceofthecallfornominees.MetroCitiessupportsopportunities
for local officials to provide input during the decennial legislative redistricting process for
the MetropolitanCouncilandsupportstransparencyintheredistrictingprocess.
4-CComprehensiveAnalysisandOversightofMetropolitanCouncil
Metro Cities supportsspecificfindings of a 2020 GovernorÓs Blue RibbonCommittee
that recommend four year staggered terms for Metropolitan Council members with
members appointed by the governor, an expanded nominating committee with a
majority of local officials on the committee, and the publication of nominees prior to
their appointment.
The metropolitan region will continue to expand while simultaneously facing significant
challenges for the effective, efficient,and equitable provision of resources and infrastructure.
Metro Cities supports an objective study of the Metropolitan CouncilÓs activities and
servicesaswell asitsgeographicaljurisdictionto ensurethattheMetropolitanCouncilÓs
2022 Legislative Policies
43
Metropolitan Agencies
services are positioned to be effective and adequate in addressing the future needs of the
region.Suchwork mustincludetheparticipationof local officials.TheMetropolitanCouncil
should also examine its scope of services to determine their benefit and efficiency and be open
toalternative methods of delivery to assure that services are provided at high levels of
effectivenessfortheregion.
Metro Cities supports appropriate legislative oversight of the Metropolitan Council to
regularlyreviewtheCouncilÓsactivities,andtoprovidetransparency andaccountabilityof
itsfunctions andoperations.
4-DFundingRegionalServices
The Metropolitan Council should continue to fund regional services and activities through a
combination of user fees, property taxes, and state and federal grants. The Council should set
user fees through an open process that includes public notices and public hearings. User fees
should be uniform by type of user and set at a level that supports effective and efficient public
services based on commonly accepted industry standards and allows for sufficient reserves to
ensure long-term service and fee stability. Fee proceeds should be used to fund regional services
orprograms forwhichtheyarecollected.
Metro Cities supports the use of property taxes and user fees to fund regional projects so
longasthebenefitconferredontheregionisproportionaltothe fee ortax,andthefee or
taxis comparabletothebenefitcitiesreceive inreturn.
4-ERegionalSystems
Regionalsystemsarestatutorilydefinedastransportation,aviation, wastewater treatmentand
recreational open space. The purpose of the regional systems and the Metropolitan CouncilÓs
authority over them is clearly outlined in state law. The Metropolitan Council must seek a
statutorychange toalterthefocusorexpandthe reachofanyofthese systems.
Systemsplansprepared bytheMetropolitanCouncil should bespecificintermsofsize,location
and timing of regional investments to allow for consideration in local comprehensive planning.
Systems plans should also clearly state the criteria by which local plans will be judged for
consistencywithregionalsystems.
Additional regional systems should be established only if there is a compelling metropolitan
problem or concern best addressed through the designation. Common characteristics of the
existing regional systems include public ownership of the system and its components and
established regional or state funding sources. These characteristics should be present in any new
regional system that might be established. Water supply and housing do not meet necessary
established criteriaforregional systems.Anyproposedadditional systemmust have an
establishedregionalorstatefundingsource.
2022 Legislative Policies
44
Metropolitan Agencies
4-FRegionalWaterSupplyPlanning
TheMetropolitanCouncilis statutorily authorizedtocarryoutregionalplanningactivitiesto
address watersupplyneeds ofthemetropolitanarea.AMetropolitanAreaWaterSupply
AdvisoryCommittee (MAWSAC)thatincludes state agencyrepresentativesandlocalofficials
was established toassisttheCouncilindevelopingamasterwatersupplyplanthatincludes
recommendations forclarifyingtherolesoflocal, regionalandstategovernments,streamlining
andconsolidatingapprovalprocesses andrecommendingfutureplanningandcapital
investments.TheMasterWaterSupplyPlanservesas aframeworkforassistingcommunitiesin
theirwatersupplyplanning,withoutusurpinglocaldecision-makingprocesses.Manycitiesalso
conducttheirownanalyses foruse inwatersupplyplanning.
As the Metropolitan Council continues its assessment of the regionÓs water supply and water
sustainability,itmustworkcooperativelywithlocalpolicymakers andprofessionalstaff
throughouttheregiononanon-goingstructuredbasis toensureabaseofinformationforwater
supplydecision-makingthatissound,credibleandverifiable,andconsiders localinformation,
data,cost-benefitanalysesandprojections before anypolicyrecommendations areissued.
MetroCitiesencourages theMetropolitanCounciltoconsidertheinter-relationships of
wastewatertreatment,stormwatermanagementandwatersupply. Anystateandregional
regulationsandprocesses shouldbeclearlystatedintheMasterWaterSupplyPlan.Further,
regional monitoring and data collection benefits should be borne as shared expenses between the
regionalandlocalunits ofgovernment.
MetroCitiessupports MetropolitanCouncilplanningactivitiestoaddress regionalwater
supplyneeds andwaterplanningactivitiesasprescribedinstatute.MetroCitiesopposes
the insertionoftheMetropolitanCouncilas anotherregulatorinthewatersupplyarena.
Further, while Metro Cities supports regionally coordinated efforts to address water
supply issues in the metropolitan area, Metro Cities opposes the elevation of water supply
to ÐRegional SystemÑ status, or the assumption of Metropolitan Council control and
managementofmunicipalwatersupplyinfrastructure.
Metro Citiessupportsthe technicaladvisory committee totheMAWSACthatmaximizes
participation by municipal officials and helps to ensure sound scientific analyses and
models are developed with local expertise and input, before legislative solutions are
considered.
Metro Cities supports efforts to identify capital funding sources to assist with municipal
water supplyprojects.Anyfeesortaxesforregionalwatersupplyplanningactivitiesmustbe
consistentwithactivitiesprescribedinMinn. Stat.§473.1565,andsupportactivities
specifically withintheregion.
4-GReviewofLocalComprehensivePlans
In advance of the next comprehensive planning cycle, the Metropolitan Council should work
with Metro Cities and local officials to address challenges and concerns identified by city
officials with the 2018 comprehensive planning process and undertake any necessary
2022 Legislative Policies
45
Metropolitan Agencies
improvements.This work should be conducted with opportunities for ongoing input and
consultation with local officials as any modifications to the comprehensive planning review
processes are considered.Local officials have identified concerns with the submission and
review processes for 2018 local plans including requests for information beyond what should be
necessary for the Metropolitan Council to review local plans for consistency with regional
systems, regional requirements that evolved as local plans were prepared and finalized and
finding plans to be incomplete or requiring detailed information on items of a local rather than
regionalnature,amongothers.
Inreviewinglocal comprehensiveplansand planamendments,theMetropolitanCouncilshould:
Recognize that its role is to review and comment, unless it is found that the local plan ismore
likely than not to have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from oneof
thefoursystemplans;
Be aware of statutory time constraints imposed by the Legislature on plan amendmentsand
developmentapplications;
Provideforimmediateeffectuationofplanamendmentsthat haveno potentialfor
substantialimpactonsystemsplans;
Requiretheinformation neededfortheMetropolitan Council tocompleteitsreview,butnot
prescribe additional content or format beyond that which is required by the Metropolitan
LandUsePlanningAct(LUPA);
Work in a cooperative and timely manner toward the resolution of outstanding issues.When
a cityÓs local comprehensive plan is deemed incompatible with the Metropolitan
CouncilÓs systems plans, Metro Cities supports a formal appeal process that includes a
peer review.Metro Citiesopposestheimpositionofsanctionsormonetary penalties
whenacityÓslocal comprehensiveplanisdeemed incompatiblewiththeMetropolitan
CouncilÓssystems plans or the plan fails to meet a statutory deadline when the city has
madelegitimate,goodfaithefforts tomeetMetropolitanCouncilrequirements;
Work with affected citiesandotherorganizationssuch asthePollutionControlAgency,
Department of Natural Resources, Department of Health and other stakeholders to identify
common ground and resolve conflicts between respective goals for flexible residential
development and achieving consistencywith the CouncilÓssystem plansand policies;and
Require entities, such as private businesses, nonprofits, or local units of government,
among others, whose actions could adversely affect a comprehensive plan, to be subject
to thesame qualifications and/orregulations as thecity.
4-HComprehensivePlanningProcess
Metro Citiessupportsexaminingthe comprehensiveplanningprocesstomakesurethatthe
2022 Legislative Policies
46
Metropolitan Agencies
process is streamlined and efficient and avoids excessive cost burdens or duplicative or
unnecessary planning requirements by municipalities in the planning process. Metro Cities
supports resources to assist cities in meeting regional goals as part of the comprehensive
planningprocess,includingplanninggrantsandtechnicalassistance.
Metro Cities supports funding and other resources from the Metropolitan Council for the
preparation ofcomprehensiveplan updates,including grantfunding.Grantsand other
resources should be provided to all eligible communities through a formula that is equitable, and
recognizesvaryingcityneeds andcapacities.
4-IComprehensivePlanningSchedule
Cities are required to submit comprehensive plan updates to the Metropolitan Council every 10
years. A cityÓs comprehensive plan represents a communityÓs vision of how the city should grow
and develop or redevelop, ensure adequate housing, provide essential public infrastructure and
services,protectnaturalareasandmeetothercommunityobjectives.
Metro Cities recognizes the merit of aligning comprehensive plan timelines with the release of
census data. However, the comprehensive plan process is expensive, time consuming and labor
intensive for cities, and the timing for the submission of comprehensive plans should not be
alteredsolely tobetteralign withcensusdata.If sufficient validreasonsexist fortheschedulefor
thenextroundofcomprehensiveplanstobechangedorexpedited,cities shouldbeprovided
withfinancialresourcestoassisttheminpreparingthe nextroundofplans.
Metro Cities opposes cities being forced into a state of perpetual planning because of
regional and legislative actions. Should changes be made to the comprehensive planning
schedule, Metro CitiesÓ supports financial and other resources to assist cities in preparing
andincorporatingpolicychanges inlocalplanningefforts.
MetroCitiessupportsa10-yeartimeframeforcomprehensiveplan updatesubmissions.
MetroCitiessupportstheMetropolitanCouncilÓsconsideration toreducerequirementsfor
10-year ComprehensivePlanupdates forcitiesunder2,500.
4-JLocalZoningAuthority
Local governmentsare responsibleforzoningandlocalofficialsshould havefull authorityto
approve variances to remain flexible in response to the unique land use needs of their own
community. Local zoning decisions, and the implementation of citiesÓ comprehensive plans,
should not be conditioned upon the approval of the Metropolitan Council or any other
governmentalagency.
Metro Cities supports local authority over land use and zoning decisions and opposes the
creation ofnon-localappealsboardswiththeauthorityto supersedecityzoning decisions,
and statutory modifications that would diminish the ability of cities to set and implement
localzoningordinances andpolicies.
2022 Legislative Policies
47
Metropolitan Agencies
4-KRegionalGrowth
Themost recentregional populationforecast prepared by theMetropolitanCouncil projectsa
populationof3,738,047peopleby2040.
MetroCitiesrecognizescitiesÓresponsibilitytoplanforsustainable growthpatterns that
integratetransportation,housing,parks,openspaceandeconomicdevelopment thatwillresultin
a region better equipped to manage population growth, to provide a high quality of life for a
growing and increasingly diverse metropolitan area population and improved environmental
health.
In developing local comprehensive plans to fit within a regional framework, adequate state and
regional financial resources and incentives and maximum flexibility for local planning decisions
are imperative. The regional framework should assist cities in managing growth while being
responsivetotheindividualqualities,characteristicsandneedsof metropolitancities,andshould
encourage sub-regionalcooperationandcoordination.
Inordertoaccommodatethis growthinamannerthatpreservesthe regionÓshighqualityoflife:
Naturalresourceprotectionwill haveto bebalanced with growthand
development/reinvestment;
Significantnewresources willhavetobeprovidedfortransportationandtransit;and
New households will have to be incorporated into the core cities, first and second-ring
suburbs,anddevelopingcitiesthroughbothdevelopmentandredevelopment.
In order forregional and local planning to result in the successful implementation of regional
policies:
TheState ofMinnesotamustcontributeadditionalfinancial resources,particularlyinthe
areas of transportation and transit, community reinvestment, affordable housing
development,and the preservation of parks and open space. If funding for regional
infrastructure is notadequate, cities should not be responsible for meeting the growth
forecast set forth by theMetropolitan Council;
TheMetropolitanCouncilandLegislaturemust work topursuelevelsofstateandfederal
transportation funding that are adequate to meet identified transportation and transit needs in
themetropolitanarea;
TheMetropolitanCouncilmust recognizethelimitationsofitsauthority andcontinueto
workwithcitiesinacollaborative,incentives-basedmanner;
TheMetropolitanCouncilmust recognizethevariousneedsand capacitiesofitsmany
partners, including but not limited to cities, counties, economic development authorities
2022 Legislative Policies
48
Metropolitan Agencies
andnonprofitorganizations,anditspoliciesmustbe balancedandflexible intheir
approach;
Metropolitan counties, adjacent counties and school districts must be brought more
thoroughlyintothediscussionduetothecriticalimportanceoffacilitiesandservices
suchascountyroads andpublicschools inaccommodatingforecastedgrowth;and
Greater recognition must be given to the fact that the ÐtrueÑ metropolitan region extends
beyond the traditional seven-county area and the need to work collaboratively with adjacent
counties in Minnesota and Wisconsin, and the cities within those counties. The region faces
environmental, transportation, and land use issues that cannot be solved by the seven-county
metroarea alone. MetroCitiessupportsananalysistodeterminethe impactsof
MetropolitanCouncilÓs growthmanagementpoliciesandinfrastructureinvestmentson
thegrowth and development of the collar counties, and the impacts of growth in the
collarcountiesonthemetropolitanarea.
Metro Cities opposes statutory or other regulatory changes that interfere with established
regional and local processes to manage growth in the metropolitan region, including
regional systems plans, systems statements, and local comprehensive plans. Such changes
erode local planning authority as well as the efficient provision of regional infrastructure,
disregard established publicprocesses,andcreatedifferentguidelinesforcommunitiesthatmay
result infinancial,environmentaland otherimpactsonsurrounding communities.
4-LNaturalResourceProtection
Metro Cities recognizes the Metropolitan CouncilÓs efforts to compile and maintain an inventory
and assessment of regionally significant natural resources for providing local communities with
additional information and technical assistance. The state and region play significant roles in the
protection of natural resources. Any steps taken by the state orMetropolitan Council regarding
the protectionofnaturalresources mustrecognizethat:
The protection of natural resources is significant to a multi-county area that is home tomore
than 50 percent of the stateÓs population and a travel destination for many more. Given the
limited availability of resources and the artificial nature of the metropolitan areaÓs borders,
andthe numerous entities that are involved in protecting the natural resources of the region
and state,neither the regionnor individual metropolitan communities would be well served
by assumingprimaryresponsibilityforfinancingandprotectingthese resources;
ThecompletionoflocalNaturalResourceInventoriesandAssessments(NRI/A)is nota
regional system norisit arequired componentoflocal comprehensiveplansunder
the Metropolitan LandUsePlanningAct;
Theprotectionofnaturalresourcesshould bebalanced with theneed toaccommodate
growth and development, reinvest in established communities, encourage more
affordablehousingandprovide transportationandtransitconnections;and
2022 Legislative Policies
49
Metropolitan Agencies
Decisions about the zoning or land use designations, either within or outside a publicpark,
naturepreserve,orotherprotectedareaare,andshould remain,theresponsibility oflocal
unitsofgovernment.
The Metropolitan CouncilÓs role with respect to climate change, as identified in the 2040
regional development guide, should be focused on the stewardship of its internal operations
(wastewater,transit)andworkingcollaborativelywithlocalgovernmentstoprovideinformation,
best practices,technical assistance andincentivesaroundresponsesto climatechange.
Metro Cities urges the Legislature and/or the Metropolitan Council to provide financial
assistance forthe preservationofregionallysignificantnaturalresources.
4-MInflowandInfiltration(I/I)
The Metropolitan Council has identified a majority of sewered communities in the metropolitan
region to be contributing excessive inflow and infiltration (I/I) into the regional wastewater
system or to be on the threshold of contributing excessive inflow and infiltration. Inflow and
infiltration are terms for the ways that clear water (ground and storm) makes its way into sanitary
sewer pipes and gets treated, unnecessarily, at regional wastewater plants. The number of
identified communities is subject to change, depending on rain events, and any city in the
metropolitan areacanbeaffected.
The Metropolitan Council establishes a surcharge on cities determined to be contributing
unacceptableamountsofI/Iintothewastewatersystem.Thechargeiswaivedwhen citiesmeet
certainparameters throughlocalmitigationefforts.
Metro Cities recognizes the importance of controlling I/I because of its potential environmental
and public health impacts, because it affects the size, and therefore the cost, of wastewater
treatment systems and because excessive I/I in one city can affect development capacity of
another. However, there is the potential for cities to incur increasingly exorbitant costs in their
ongoing efforts to mitigate excessive I/I. Therefore, managing I/I at a regional as well as local
level,iscriticaltoeffectivemitigationandcostmanagement.
Metro Cities continues to monitor the surcharge program and supports continued reviews
ofthemethodologyusedtomeasureexcessI/Itoensurethat themethodology
appropriately normalizes for precipitation variability and the CouncilÓs work with cities on
communityspecificissues aroundI/I.
Metro Citiessupportsstatefinancialassistancefor metroareaI/Imitigationthroughfuture
Clean Water Legacy Act appropriations or similar legislation and encourages the
Metropolitan Council to partner in support of such appropriations. Metro Cities also
supportsresources,includingidentifiedbestpractices,informationonmodelordinances,
public education and outreach, and other tools, to local governments to address
inflow/infiltrationmitigationforprivateproperties.
Metro Cities recognizes recommendations made by a 2016 Inflow/Infiltration Task Force that
2022 Legislative Policies
50
Metropolitan Agencies
support considering the use of a portion of the regional wastewater charge for private property
inflow/infiltration mitigation. Any proposal to utilize the wastewater fee for this purpose must
include the opportunityforlocalofficialstoreviewandcommentonspecific proposals.
Metro Cities supports continued state capital assistance to provide grants to metropolitan
citiesformitigatinginflowandinfiltrationproblemsintomunicipalwastewatercollection
systems.
4-NSewerAvailabilityCharge(SAC)
MetroCitiessupportsaSACprogramthat emphasizesequity,transparency,simplification
andlowerrates.
Metro Cities supports principles for SAC that include program transparency and
simplicity,equity forallservedcommunitiesandbetweencurrentandfutureusers,
support for citiesÓ sewer fee capacities, administrative reasonableness, and weighing any
program uses for specific goals with the impacts to the programÓs equity, transparency and
simplicity.Assuch,MetroCitiesopposestheuseoftheSACmechanismto subsidizeand/or
incent specific Metropolitan Council goals and objectives. Input from local officials should be
sought if the SAC reserve is proposed to be used for any purpose other than debt service,
including pay-as-you-go (PAYGO). Metro Cities opposes increases to the SAC rate while the
reserve is projected to exceed the Metropolitan CouncilÓs minimum reserve balance,
withouttheexpress engagementofcityofficialsinthemetropolitanarea.
MetroCitiessupportsmodificationsthatwererecommendedbylocalandbusinessofficials
and adopted by the Metropolitan Council in 2018 to use gross rather than net square feet
in making SAC determinations, to combine use categories, to adjust the grandfather credit
dateandtonotrequireanewSACdetermination forbusinessremodelsthatdonotchange
the use of the property. These changes were intended to simplify the SAC program forusers,
andtoreduceincidents ofÐsurpriseÑSACcharges.
Metro Cities supports current SAC policy that enhances flexibility in the SAC credit
structure for redevelopment purposes and supports continued evaluation of SAC fees to
determine iftheyhinderredevelopment.
Metro Citiessupportsthe Metropolitan Councilprovidingdetailsonhowany proposed
changes to theSAC rate are determined. Metro Cities supports a periodic review of
MCESÓ customer service policies, to ensure that its processes are responsive and
transparenttocommunities,businessesandresidents. MetroCitiessupportscontinued
outreach by MCEStousersoftheSACprogramtopromoteknowledgeand
understandingof SAC charges and policies. Any modifications to the SAC program or
structure should beconsideredonlywiththeparticipationandinputoflocalofficials inthe
metropolitanregion.
Metro Cities supports a Ðgrowth pays for growthÑ approach to SAC. If state statutes are
modifiedtoestablish aÐgrowthpaysforgrowthÑmethodforSAC,theMetropolitan Council
2022 Legislative Policies
51
Metropolitan Agencies
should convene a group of local officials to identify any technical changes necessary for
implementingthenewstructure.
Metro CitiessupportsallowingtheCounciltoutilizeaSACÒtransferÓmechanismwhenthe
SAC reserve fund is inadequate to meet debt service obligations. Any use of the transfer
mechanism must be done so within parameters prescribed by state law and with appropriate
notification and processes to allow local official input and should include a timely Òshift backÓ of
anyfundsthatweretransferredfromthewastewaterfundtotheSACreservefund. Efforts
should be made to avoid increasing the municipal wastewater charge in use of the transfer
mechanism.
4-OFundingRegionalParks&OpenSpace
In the seven-county metropolitan area, regional parks essentially serve as state parks, and the
stateshouldcontinue toprovide capitalfunding forthe acquisition,developmentand
improvement of these parks in a manner that is equitable with funding for state parks. State
funding apart from Legacy funds should equal 40 percent of the operating budget for regional
parks.Legacyfundsforparksandtrailsshouldbebalancedbetweenthe metroandgreater
Minnesota.
Metro Citiessupportsstatefundingfor regionalparksandtrailsthatisfair,createsa
balance ofinvestmentacross the state,andmeetstheneedsoftheregion.
4-PLivableCommunities
TheLivableCommunities Act(LCA)isadministeredbytheMetropolitanCouncilandprovides
a voluntary, incentive-based approach to affordable housing development, tax base revitalization,
job growth and preservation, brownfield clean up and mixed-use, transit-friendly development,
and redevelopment. Metro Cities strongly supports the continuation of this approach, which
is widely accepted and utilized by cities. Since its inception in 1995 the LCA program has
generated billions of dollars of private and public investment, created thousands of jobs and
addedthousands ofaffordablehousingunits intheregion.
Metro Cities monitors the LCA programs on an ongoing basis and supports any necessary
program modifications to ensure that the LCA program criteria are flexible and promote
theparticipationofallparticipatingcommunities,andtoensureallmetropolitanareacities
areeligible toparticipate intheLivable CommunitiesDemonstrationAccount(LCDA).
Metro Cities supports increased funding and flexible eligibility requirements in the LCDA
to assist communities with development that may not be exclusively market driven or
market proven in the location, in order to support important development and
redevelopment goals. Metro Cities supports the findings of a recent local official working
group that identified the need for the Metropolitan Council to expand its outreach to
communitieson the LCAprogramsandtocontinue effortstoensurethatLCAcriteria are
sufficiently flexible to meet the range of identified program objectives. These efforts should
2022 Legislative Policies
52
Metropolitan Agencies
include ongoingopportunitiesforstructuredinputbyMetroCitiesandlocalofficials.
Metro Cities supports the statutory goals and criteria established for the Livable
CommunitiesActandopposesanychangesto LCAprogramsthatconstrainflexibility in
statutorygoals orprogramrequirements andcriteria. Metro Cities is monitoring2021
modifications to the LCA program to ensure that program criteria areresponsive to local
needs within the context of overall LCAobjectives.
Metro Citiesopposesfunding reductionstotheLivable CommunitiesActprogramsandthe
transfer or useofthesefundsforpurposes outside ofthe LCAprogram.
MetroCitiessupportsstatutory modificationsintheLCDAtoreflectthelinkagesamong
thegoals,municipalobjectives,and MetropolitanCouncilsystemobjectives.
Metro Cities supports the use of LCA funds for projects in transit improvement areas, as
defined in statute, if funding levels for general LCA programs are adequate to meet
programgoalsandtheprogramremainsaccessible toparticipating communities.
Any proposed program modifications should be considered with input by local officials
before changes to LCA programs are enacted or implemented. Use of interest earnings from
LCA fundsshould be limited to covering administrative program costs. Remaining interest
earnings should be considered part of LCA funds and used to fund grants from established LCA
accountsperestablishedfundingcriteria.
4-QDensity
MetroCitiesrecognizestheneed foradensity policy,includingminimumdensity requirements,
that allows the Metropolitan Council to effectively plan for and deliver cost-efficient regional
infrastructure and services. Regional density requirements must recognize that local decisions,
needs and priorities vary, and that requirements must be sufficiently flexible to accommodate
local circumstances as well as the effect of market trends on local development and
redevelopmentactivity.
TheMetropolitanCouncilaskscitiestoplanfor achievingminimumaveragenetdensitiesacross
all areas identified for new growth, development or redevelopment. Because each community is
different,how andwheredensityisguidedisdeterminedbythelocalunitofgovernment,
regional density requirements should use minimum average net densities.
Metro Cities opposesparcel-specificdensityrequirementsassuchrequirementsare
contrarytotheneedforlocalflexibilityinaregionalpolicy.
Any regional density policy must use local data and local development patterns and must
accommodatelocalphysical andland useconstraintssuchas,butnotlimitedto,wetlands,public
open space,trees,waterbodiesand rights-of-way,andany correspondingfederal andstate
regulationsimposedonlocalgovernments whencomputingnetdensities.
2022 Legislative Policies
53
Metropolitan Agencies
The Metropolitan Council must coordinate with local governments in establishing or revising
regionaldensity requirementsandshould ensurethat regional density andplat monitoringreports
comprehensivelyreflectlocaldensitiesandlanduses.
2022 Legislative Policies
54
Transportation
TransportationPoliciesandFundingIntroduction
MetroCitiessupportsacomprehensivetransportation systemasavitalcomponentin
planning for and meeting the physical, social,and economic needs of the state and
metropolitanregion.
A comprehensive transportation system includes streets and bridges, transit, and multi-modal
solutionsthat work cohesively tobest meet state,regional and local transportationneeds.
Adequate andstablesourcesoffundingare necessarytoensure thedevelopmentand
maintenance of a high quality, efficient and safe transportation system that meets these needs and
that will position the state and region to be economically competitive in the years ahead. Failure
to maintain a functional transportation system will have adverse effects on the stateÓs ability to
attractandretainbusinesses andcreatejobs.
Transportation funding and planning must be a high priority for state, regional and local
policymakers so that the transportation system can meet the needs of the stateÓs residents and
businesses as well as projected population growth. Funding and planning for regional and
statewidesystemsmust becoordinated atthefederal,state,regional and locallevelsto optimally
achievelong-termneeds andgoals.
5-ARoadandBridgeFunding
Under current financing structures that rely primarily on local property taxes and fees as well as
the motor vehicle sales tax (MVST) receipts, road and bridge needs in the metropolitan region
continue to be underfunded. Metro Cities strongly supports stable, sufficient,and
sustainablestatewide transportation funding and expanded local tools to meet the
transportationsystem needs of the region and local municipal systems. Consideration
should be given tousing new, expanded,and existing resources to meet these needs. Metro
Cities supports the useofdedicatedtaxesandfeestofundtransportationinfrastructure.
In addition, cities lack adequate tools and resources for the maintenance and improvement of
municipal street systems, with resources restricted to property taxes and special assessments. It is
imperative that alternative revenue generating authority be granted to municipalities and that
state resources be made available for this purpose to aid local communities and relieve the
burden on the property tax system. Metro Cities supports Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS)
funding. MSAS provides an important but limited revenue source that assists eligible cities with
streetinfrastructureneeds andis limitedtotwentypercentofacityÓsstreetsystem.
Metro Cities supports state funding to assist cities over-burdened by cost participation
responsibilitiesfromimprovementprojectsonthestateÓsarterial systemandcountystate
aidhighway(CSAH)systems.
Metro Citiessupportsstatefundingforstatehighway projects,includingcongestion,
2022 Legislative Policies
55
Transportation
bottleneckandsafetyimprovements.MetroCitiesalsosupportsstatefinancialassistance,
as well as innovations in design and construction, to offset the impacts of regional
transportationconstructionprojectsonbusinesses.
MetroCitiesopposesstatutorychangesrestricting theuseoflocal fundsfortransportation
projects.MetroCitiesopposesrestrictionsonaesthetic relatedcomponentsof
transportation projects, as these components often provide important safety and other
benefitstoprojects.
Metro Cities supports further research into the policy implications for electric and
automatedvehiclesonroadways,transit,andothercomponentsoftransportationsystems.
Metro Cities encourages the state to study the impact of electric and automated vehicles on
transportationrelatedfundingandpolicies.
5-BRegionalTransitSystem
The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area needs a multi-modal regional transit system as part of a
comprehensive transportation strategy that serves all users, including commuters and the transit
dependent. The transit system should be composed of a mix of high occupancy vehicle (HOV)
lanes,high occupancytoll(HOT)lanes,anetworkofbike andpedestriantrails,busrapidtransit,
express and regular route bus service, exclusive transit ways, light rail transit, streetcars, and
commuter rail corridors designed to connect residential, employment, retail,and entertainment
centers. The system should be regularly monitored and adjusted to ensure that routes of service
correspondtotheregionÓschangingtravelpatterns.
Currentcongestionlevelsandforecastedpopulationgrowthrequireastable,reliable,and
growing source of revenue for transit construction and operations so that our metropolitan region
can meet its transportation needs to remain economically competitive. Metro Cities supports an
effective,efficient,andcomprehensiveregionaltransitsystemas aninvaluablecomponent
in meeting the multimodal transportation needs of the metropolitan region and to the
regionÓs economic vibrancy and quality of life. Metro Cities recognizes that transit service
connects residents to jobs, schools, healthcare,and activity centers. Transit access and service
frequencylevels shouldrecognize theroleofpublictransitinaddressingequity,includingbut
not limited to racial and economic disparities, people with disabilities and the elderly. Metro
Citiessupports strategic expansionoftheregionaltransitsystem.
Metro Cities supports a regional governance structure that ensuresa measurablyreliable
and efficient system, recognizes the diverse transit needs of our region andaddresses
fundingneedsforallcomponentsof thesystem.Thesestructuresmustwork withand be
responsivetotheneedsofthecommunitiestheyserve.
Metro Cities supportsan open and collaborative regional transportation planning process
that fully engages all public transit providers as partners in ongoing policy development to
achieve desired outcomes, including establishment of transit project criteria that promote
fair and equitable selection of projects throughout the region and transparent regional
2022 Legislative Policies
56
Transportation
distribution of available funding.
MetroCitiesrecognizestheneedforflexibility intransitsystemsforcitiesthatbordertheedges
of the seven-county metropolitan area to ensure users can get to destinations outside of the
seven-county area. Metro Cities encourages the Metropolitan Council to coordinate with collar
countiessothatriderscangettoandfromdestinationsbeyondtheboundariesoftheregion.
Metro Cities opposes statutory changes restricting the use of local funds for planning or
construction of transit projects. Restricting local planning and funding limits the ability of
citiestoparticipateintransitcorridorplanninganddevelopment.State andregional
policymakersmust coordinatewithlocalunitsofgovernment asdecisionsaremadeat thestate
level ontransitprojectsthat alsoinvolvemunicipalplanning,funding,and policydecisions.
Metro Citiesisopposedto legislativeorMetropolitan Council directivesthatconstrainthe
ability of metropolitan transit providers to provide a full range of transit services,
includingreversecommuteroutes,suburb-to-suburbroutes,transithubfeederservicesor
new, experimental services that may show a low rate of operating cost recovery from the
farebox.
In the interest of including all potential options in the pursuit of a regionally balanced
transit system, Metro Cities supports the repeal of the gag order onthe Dan Patch
CommuterRailLineand opposestheimposition oflegislativemoratoriumsonthestudy,
planning,design,or constructionofspecifictransitprojects.
Intheinterestof safetyandtrafficmanagement,MetroCitiessupportsfurtherstudyofrail
safety issues relating to water quality protections, public safety concerns relating to
derailments, traffic implications from longer and more frequent trains and the sensitive
balance between rail commerce and the quality-of-lifeimpacts on the communities through
whichtheypass.
The COVID-19 crisis has had dramatic effects on public transit service, including changing
business practices that are likely to substantially reduce transit demand for the foreseeable future.
Adverseeconomiceffectsthreatenrevenuesavailabletofundtransitoperations.Suburbantransit
providers areconcernedthatfundingchallenges maybeusedtoattempttojustifyarepealof
their authorizing legislation and to consolidate transit services into a single regional entity. This
would result in reverting to conditions existing nearly 40 years ago when inadequate service
causedtwelvesuburbstoelectnottobepartofthetraditionaltransitsystem.
Metro Cities strongly supports the autonomy of suburban transit providers to conduct
operations to meet demonstrated and unique needs in their designated service areas
independentfromthe operations ofotherregionaltransitproviders.
5-CTransitFinancing
Shifting demographics in the metropolitan region will mean increased demand for various modes
of transit in areas with and without current transit service. MVST revenue projections are
2022 Legislative Policies
57
Transportation
unpredictable, and theLegislaturehasrepeatedly reduced general fund supportforMetroTransit,
whichcontributes topersistentoperatingdeficitsforregionaltransitproviders.
Operating subsidies necessary to support a regional system should come from regional and
statewidefunding sourcesand not localtaxpayers.Inrecent years,stateand regionalresources
for transithavediminished,with costsshiftingto local taxpayersin themetropolitanarea.A
systemoftransit providessignificanteconomicbenefitsto thestateandmetropolitanregion
andmust be supported with state and regional revenue sources. In addition, capital costs for
theexpansion of the regional transit system should be supported through state and regional
sources, andnotthe soleresponsibilityoflocalunits ofgovernment.
Metro Cities supports stable and predictable state and regional revenue sources to fund
operating and capital expenses for all regional transit providers and Metro Mobility at a
levelsufficienttomeetthe growingoperationalandcapitaltransitneedsoftheregionand
toexpandthesystemtoareas thatlacksufficienttransitservice options.
MetroCitiescontinuesto support anadvisory roleformunicipalofficialsindecisions
associatedwithlocaltransitprojects.
5-DStreetImprovementDistricts
Funding sources for local transportation projects are limited to the use of Municipal State Aid
StreetProgram(MSAS),propertytaxesand specialassessments.Inaddition,citiesunder5,000
in population are not eligible for MSA. With increasing pressures on city budgets and limited
toolsandresources,citiesarefindingitincreasinglydifficulttomaintainagingstreets.
Street improvementdistrictsallowcitiesin developed and developing areastofund new
constructionas wellas reconstructionandmaintenance efforts.
The street improvement district is designed to allow cities, through a fair and objective fee
structure, to create a district or districts within the city in which fees are raised on properties in
the district and spent within the boundaries of the district. Street improvement districts would
alsoaidcitiesunder 5,000withanalternativetothepropertytaxsystemand specialassessments.
Metro Cities supports the authority of local units of government to establish street
improvement districts. Metro Cities also supports changes to special assessment laws to
make assessing state-owned property a more predictable process with uniformity in the
paymentofassessments acrossthestate.
5-EHighwayandBridgeTurnBacks&Funding
Cities do not have the financial capacity and in many cities the technical expertise other than
throughsignificantpropertytaxincreases, toabsorbadditionalroadwayorbridgeinfrastructure
responsibilities without new funding sources. The existing municipal turnback fund is not
adequate basedoncontemplatedturnbacks.
2022 Legislative Policies
58
Transportation
Metro Cities supports jurisdictional reassignment or turnback of roads (Minn. Stat. §
161.16,subd.4)onaphased basisusingfunctional classificationsandotherappropriate
criteria subject to a corresponding mechanism for adequate funding of roadway
improvementsandcontinuedmaintenance.
Metro Cities does not support awholesale turnback of county or state roads or bridges
without the consent of the municipality and the total cost, agreed to by the municipality,
beingreimbursed to the city in a timely manner. The process for establishing state policies
to assigna shared cost participation for newly constructed or rebuilt bridges over trunk
highways to localofficials, must include input by the local municipalities affected, and any
assigned shared costs andresponsibilitiesmustbe agreedtobythemunicipalities.
5-F Ð 3C Ñ TransportationPlanningProcess:ElectedOfficials Ó Role
The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) was developed to meet federal requirements,
designating the Metropolitan Council as the organization that is responsible for a continuous,
comprehensive and cooperative (3C) transportation planning process to allocate federal funds
among metropolitanareaprojects.Inputby local officialsintotheplanning andprioritization of
transportationinvestmentsintheregionisavitalcomponentofthese processes.
Metro Citiessupportscontinuation oftheTABwith amajority oflocallyelectedmunicipal
officialsas membersandparticipatingintheprocess.
5-GElectronicImagingforEnforcementofTrafficLaws
Enforcement of traffic laws with cameras and other motion imaging technology has been
demonstrated toimprovedrivercompliance andsafety.
MetroCitiessupportslocallaw enforcement agencieshaving theauthorityto usesuch
technology,includingphotos andvideos,toenforcetrafficlaws.
5-HTransportationNetworkCompaniesandAlternativeTransportationModes
The introduction of transportation network companies (TNC) such as Lyft and Uber, vehicle
sharing and other wheeled transportation modes such as bicycles and scooters, require the need
for local officials to determine licensing and inspection requirements for these modes, and to
address issues concerning management over public rights-of-way. Cities have the authority to
license rideshare companies, inspect vehicles, license drivers,and regulate access to sidewalks
and streets. The use of autonomous delivery robots and aerial drones in public rights-of-way is
also becoming more prevalent and cities must maintain and enhance the authority necessary to
regulate theuse ofthese vehicles toensure safe useofthepublic rightofway.
MetroCitiessupportstheauthorityof localofficialstoregulateandestablish feesonthese
transportation modes. Emerging and future transportation technologies have potentially
2022 Legislative Policies
59
Transportation
significant implications for local public safety and local public service levels, the needs and
impactsofwhichvarybycommunity.
5-IAirportNoiseMitigation
AcknowledgingthatthecommunitiesclosesttoMSPandreliever airportsaresignificantly
impacted bynoise,traffic,andothernumerous expansion-relatedissues:
Metro Cities supports the broad goal of providing MSP-impacted communitiesgreater
representationontheMetropolitan AirportsCommission(MAC).MetroCities
encouragescontinued communication between MAC commissioners and the citiesthey
represent.Balancingtheneeds ofthe MAC,thebusinesscommunityandthe airporthost
citiesandtheir residents requires open communication, planning and coordination. Cities
must beviewedas partners with the MAC in resolving differences that arise out of airport
projects and thedevelopment of adjacent parcels. Regular contact between the MAC and
cities throughout aproject proposal process will enhance communication and problem
solving. The MAC shouldprovide full funding for noise mitigation for all structures in
communities impacted by flights inandoutofMSP;and
MetroCitiessupportsnoise abatementprograms andexpendituresandtheworkofthe
Noise Oversight Committee to minimize the impacts of MAC operated facilities on
neighboring communities. The MAC should determine the design and geographic reach of
these programs only after a thorough public input process that considers the priorities and
concerns of impacted cities and their residents. The MAC should provide full funding for
noisemitigationforallstructures incommunitiesimpactedbyflightsinandoutofMSP.
5-JFundingforNon-MunicipalStateAid(MSAS)CityStreets
Cities under 5,000 in population do not directly receive non-property tax funds for collectorand
arterial streets. Cities over 5,000 residents have limited eligibility for dedicated HighwayUser
Tax Distribution Fund dollars, which are capped by the state constitution as being availablefor
up to twenty percent of streets. Current County State Aid Highway (CSAH) distributions to
metropolitancountiesareinadequatetoprovidefortheneedsofsmallercitiesinthe metropolitan
area. Possible funding sources include the five-percent set-aside account in the Highway User
Tax Distribution Fund, modification to county municipal accounts, street improvement districts,
and/orstategeneralfunds.
The 2015 Legislature created a Small Cities Assistance Account that is distributed through a
formula to cities with populations under 5,000. The Account has received periodic one-time
appropriations,butnostableordedicatedsourceoffunding.
Cities need long-term, stable, funding for street improvements and maintenance. Metro Cities
supports additional resources and flexible policies to meet local infrastructure needs and
increased demands on city streets. Metro Cities also supports sustainable state funding
sources for non-MSAS city streets, including funding for the Small Cities Assistance
Account as well as support for the creation and funding of a Large Cities Assistance
2022 Legislative Policies
60
Transportation
Account.
5-KCountyStateAidHighway(CSAH)DistributionFormula
Significant resource needs remain in the metro area CSAH system. Revenues provided by the
Legislature for the CSAH system have resulted in a higher number of projects being completed,
however, greater pressure is being placed on municipalitiesto participate in cost sharing
activities, encumbering an already over-burdened local funding system. When the alternative is
not building or maintaining roads, cities bear not only the costs of their local systems but also
payupwardoffiftypercentofcountyroadprojects.MetroCitiessupportsspecialor
additional funding for cities that have burdens of additional cost participation in projects
involvingcountyroads.
CSAH eligible roads were designated by county engineers in 1956 and although only 10 percent
of the CSAH roads are in the metro area, they account for nearly 50 percent of the vehicle miles
traveled. The CSAH formula passed by the Legislature in 2008 increased the amount of CSAH
funding for the metropolitan area from 18 percent in 2007 to 21 percent in 2011. The formula
helpsto betteraccountforneedsin themetropolitan region butisonlythefirst stepinaddressing
needsforadditionalresources fortheregion.
Metro Citiessupportsanew CSAHformulamoreequitablydesigned tofundthe needsof
our metropolitanregion.
5-LMunicipalInput/ConsentforTrunkHighwaysandCountyRoads
State statutes direct the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to submit detailed
plans, with city cost estimates, at a point one-and-a-half to two years prior to bid letting, at
which time public hearings are held for community input. If MnDOT does not concur with
requestedchanges,itmayappeal.Currently,thatprocesswouldtakeamaximumofthreeanda
halfmonthsandtheresultsofthe appeals boardarebindingonboththecityandMnDOT.
Metro Cities supports the municipal consent process and opposes changes to weaken
municipal consent or adding another level of government to the consent process. Metro
Cities opposes changes to current statutes that would allow MnDOT to disregard the
appeals board ruling for state trunk highways. Such a change would significantly minimize
MnDOTÓs need to negotiate in good faith with cities for appropriate project access and alignment
andwouldrenderthepublichearingandappeals processmeaningless.MetroCitiesalso
opposes the elimination of the county road municipal consent and appeal process for these
reasons.
5-MPlatAuthority
Current law grants counties review and comment authority for access and drainage issues for city
platsabuttingcountyroads.
Metro Citiesopposesanystatutory changethatwould grantcountiesvetopower orthat
wouldshortenthe 120-dayreview andpermitprocess time.
2022 Legislative Policies
61
Transportation
5-NMnDOTMaintenanceBudget
The state has failed in its responsibility for maintaining major roads throughout the state by
requiring,throughomission,thatcitiesbeartheburdenofmaintainingmajorstateroads.
MnDOT should be required to meet standards adopted by cities through local ordinances, or
reimburse cities for labor, equipment and materialused on the stateÓs behalf to improve public
safety or meet local standards. Furthermore, if a city performs maintenance, the city should be
fullyreimbursed.
Metro Cities supports MnDOT taking full responsibility for maintaining state-owned
infrastructureandproperty,including,butnotlimitedto,soundwallsandrightofway,
within city limits. Metro Cities supports cooperative agreements between cities and
MnDOT, which have proven to be effective in other parts of the state. Metro Cities
supportsadequatestate fundingforthemaintenanceofstaterights-of-way.
5-OTransitTaxingDistrict
Thetransit taxingdistrict,whichfundsthecapitalcost oftransitserviceintheMetropolitanArea
through the property tax system, is inequitable. Because the boundaries of the transit taxing
district do not correspond with any rational service line nor is being within the boundaries a
guarantee to receive service, cities within and outside of the taxing district are contributing
unequallytothetransitserviceinthe MetropolitanArea.This inequityshouldbe corrected.
MetroCitiessupportsastablerevenuesourcetofundboththecapitalandoperatingcosts
for transit at the Metropolitan Council. However, Metro Cities does not support the
expansion of the transit taxing district without a corresponding increase in service and an
overall increase in operational funds. To do so would create additional property taxes
withoutacorrespondingbenefit.
5-PCompleteStreets
A complete street may include sidewalks, bike lanes (or wide paved shoulders), special bus
lanes, comfortable and accessible public transportation stops, frequent and safe crossing
opportunities,medianislands, accessiblepedestriansignals, curbextensions,narrowertravel
lanesandmore.
Acompletestreet inaruralareawilldifferfromacompletestreet inahighly urbanarea,but
bothare designedtobalance safetyandconvenience foreveryoneusingtheroad.
Metro Cities supports options in state design guidelines for complete streets that would give
citiesgreaterflexibilityto:
Safely accommodateallmodesoftravel;
2022 Legislative Policies
62
Transportation
Lowertravelingspeedson localstreets;
Addresscityinfrastructureneeds;and
Ensurelivabilityintheappropriatecontextforeachcity.
Metro Cities opposes state-imposed mandates that would increase street infrastructure
improvementcostsin locationsandinstanceswhereprovidingaccessforalternativemodes
including cycling and walking are deemed unnecessary or inappropriate as determined by
localjurisdictions.
2022 Legislative Policies
63
2021 Municipal Revenues Committee Members
NameTitleOrganization
LanceBenninghoff Policy Analyst In-Transition
Brooke Bordson Senior Project Coordinator-Government AffairsMetropolitan Council
BridgetBruska Finance DirectorRogers
Gary Carlson IGR DirectorLeague of MN Cities
CaseyCasella Management AnalystSavage
JimDickinson City AdministratorAndover
LoriEconomy-Scholler*ChiefFinancialOfficerBloomington
LaTonia Green Finance DirectorBrooklyn Park
DanaHardie City ManagerVictoria
StevenHuser GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
TomLawell City AdministratorAppleValley
Daniel Lightfoot IGR RepresentativeLeagueof MNCities
KristiLuger City ManagerExcelsior
MelanieMeskoLee City ManagerBurnsville
MadelineMitchell SeniorBudget AnalystSt. Paul
Fatima Moore Senior GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
DarinNelson Finance DirectorMinnetonka
AlysenNesse GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
Loren Olson GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
MichaelSable AssistantCity ManagerMaplewood
CaraSchulz CouncilmemberBurnsville
Steven Stahmer City AdministratorRogers
ChristianTaylor PolicyAssociateSt. Paul
ChristinaVolkers City AdministratorOakdale
ThaoMeeXiong Intergovernmental RelationsDirectorSt. Paul
Nyle Zikmund City AdministratorMounds View
*Committee Chair
64
2021 Housing & Economic Development Committee Members
NameTitleOrganization
KarenBarton CommunityDevelopmentDirectorSt.Louis Park
KarlBatalden CommunityDevelopmentCoordinatorWoodbury
LanceBenninghoff Policy AnalystIn-Transition
JoshBerg CouncilmemberElkoNewMarket
Kim Berggren CommunityDevelopmentDirectorBrooklynPark
Brooke Bordson Senior Project Coordinator-Government AffairsMetropolitan Council
Jody Brennan CouncilmemberShakopee
Connie Buesgens CouncilmemberColumbia Heights
Heather Butkowski City AdministratorLauderdale
Gary Carlson IGR Director League of MN Cities
MartyDoll Community&EconomicDevelopmentDirectorVictoria
JenniFaulkner CommunityDevelopmentDirectorBurnsville
JasonGadd MayorHopkins
BenGozola Asst. DirectorofCommunityAssetsandDevelopmentNew Brighton
JaniceGundlach CommunityDevelopmentDirectorRoseville
MauriceHarris CouncilmemberGoldenValley
BryanHartman HRA ProgramManagerBloomington
Stephanie Hawkinson AffordableHousingDevelopmentManagerandPlanningEdina
ChrisHeineman City AdministratorLittleCanada
JoeHogeboom Community&EconomicDevelopmentDirectorMaple Grove
StevenHuser GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
SteveJuetten CommunityDevelopmentDirectorPlymouth
Irene Kao IGR CounselLeague of MN Cities
Daniel Lightfoot IGR RepresentativeLeagueof MNCities
Fatima Moore Senior GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
AlysenNesse GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
BruceNordquist CommunityDevelopmentDirectorAppleValley
Loren Olson GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
RichardPaul CouncilmemberBlaine
CaraSchulz CouncilmemberBurnsville
TracyShimek*CommunityDevelopmentDirectorWhite Bear Lake
Cherie Shoquist Housing & Economic Development ManagerGolden Valley
LoriSommers SeniorPlannerPlymouth
Mike Supina CouncilmemberEagan
ChristianTaylor PolicyAssociateSt. Paul
JulieUrban Housing&RedevelopmentManagerRichfield
JasonWedel City ManagerPrior Lake
JulieWischnack CommunityDevelopmentDirectorMinnetonka
ThaoMeeXiong Intergovernmental RelationsDirectorSt. Paul
*Committee Chair
65
2021 Metropolitan Agencies Committee Members
NameTitleOrganization
LanceBenninghoff Policy AnalystIn-Transition
Brooke Bordson Senior Project Coordinator-Government AffairsMetropolitan Council
DebCalvert CouncilmemberMinnetonka
JimDickinson City AdministratorAndover
Thomas Fletcher CouncilmemberGreenwood
Gary Hansen CouncilmemberEagan
DanaHardie City ManagerVictoria
StevenHuser GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
ElizabethKautz MayorBurnsville
GreggLindberg Deputy CityManagerBurnsville
AmadaMarquezSimula MayorColumbiaHeights
DebMcMillan MayorVictoria
Fatima Moore Senior GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
AlysenNesse GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
Loren Olson GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
Jay Stroebel*City ManagerBrooklyn Park
ChristianTaylor PolicyAssociateSt. Paul
ThaoMeeXiong Intergovernmental RelationsDirectorSt. Paul
Nyle Zikmund City AdministratorMounds View
*Committee Chair
66
2021 Transportation & General Government Policy Committee Members
NameTitleOrganization
Geralyn Barone CityManagerMinnetonka
Lance Benninghoff Policy Analyst In-Transition
Josh Berg CouncilmemberElkoNewMarket
Brooke Bordson Senior Project Coordinator-Government AffairsMetropolitan Council
Jody Brennan CouncilmemberShakopee
Kissy Coakley CouncilmemberMinnetonka
Anne Finn AssistantIGRDirectorLeagueofMNCities
Thomas Fletcher CouncilmemberGreenwood
Jason Gadd MayorHopkins
Gary Hansen CouncilmemberEagan
Mike Huang*CouncilmemberChaska
Steven Huser GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
Irene Kao IGR CounselLeague of MN Cities
Dan Kealey CouncilmemberBurnsville
Larry Kraft CouncilmemberSt.LouisPark
Brad Larson CityAdministratorSavage
Stephanie Levine MayorMendotaHeights
Daniel Lightfoot IGRRepresentativeLeagueofMNCities
Mark Maloney PublicWorksDirectorShoreview
Tom McCarty CityAdministratorStillwater
Mary McComber MayorOakParkHeights
Deb McMillan MayorVictoria
Justin Miller CityAdministratorLakeville
Fatima Moore SeniorGovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
Heidi Nelson CityAdministratorMapleGrove
Alysen Nesse GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
Loren Olson GovernmentRelationsRepresentativeMinneapolis
Ryan Peterson PublicWorksDirectorBurnsville
Dan Ruiz PublicWorksDirectorBrooklynPark
Dave Shoger PublicWorksDirectorVictoria
Christian Taylor PolicyAssociateSt.Paul
Michael Thompson PublicWorksDirectorPlymouth
Wally Wysopal CityManagerFridley
ThaoMee Xiong IntergovernmentalRelationsDirectorSt.Paul
Nyle Zikmund CityAdministratorMoundsView
*Committee Chair
67
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: Requested Council Meeting Date:
October 27, 2021
Planning
VIII.1
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Final Plat - Sutton Transport (Rehbein Industrial)
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
The City Council approved the Preliminary Plat on 7/28. At that same meeting, the CC reviewed the Site Plan
and Conditional Use Permit. However, the Site Plan and CUP have not yet been official approved by Council
Action. On 9/22, the CC approved the Developer's Agreement for Sutton Transport.
Finally, an application for Final Plat was submitted, but has, also, not yet been approved.
There have been no significant changes to the site plan, CUP or plat since the 7/28 meeting where they were all
reviewed. Staff is supportive of the applications from the developer for Site Plan Review, Conditional Use
Permit and Final Plat and recommends approval of all three.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
Motion to approve the Site Plan, Conditional Use Permit and Final Plat for Sutton Transport.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
X
Vote Record: Aye Nay
_____
_____
Final Plat, Final Site Plans
Other (specify) ____________
_____ _____
_____
_____
_______________________________________________________________
_____ _____Ki
_____ ____________________________________________________________________
Administration Department Use:
Refer to: _________________________________
Consent
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Regular
Other: ___________________________________
f:\\jobs\\9441 - 9460\\9443 - sutton transport - centerville\\cad c3d\\engineering\\9443_cover.dwg06/23/21Save Date:
JTRJTR
Centerville, Minnesota
SUTTON TRANSPORT
09/03/21
10
Weston, WI 54476-0378
8011 Schofield Avenue
of
SUTTON TRANSPORT, INC
Joseph T. Radach, P.E.
COVER
C1
REVISIONS 1. 09/03/21 ISSUED FOR PERMITDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:
Name:Signature:Date:09/03/21License #:45889
I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State
of Minnesota
R
Know what's
Centerville, Minnesota
~ Site Improvement Plans ~
SUTTON TRANSPORT
f:\\jobs\\9441 - 9460\\9443 - sutton transport - centerville\\cad c3d\\engineering\\9443_remove.dwg06/21/21Save Date:
JTRJTR
Centerville, Minnesota
SUTTON TRANSPORT
09/03/21
10
Weston, WI 54476-0378
8011 Schofield Avenue
of
SUTTON TRANSPORT, INC
& REMOVALS PLAN
Joseph T. Radach, P.E.
EXISTING CONDITIONS
C2
REVISIONS 1. 09/03/21 ISSUED FOR PERMITDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:
Name:Signature:Date:09/03/21License #:45889
I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State
of Minnesota
R
Know what's
f:\\jobs\\9441 - 9460\\9443 - sutton transport - centerville\\cad c3d\\engineering\\9443_site.dwg06/21/21Save Date:
JTRJTR
Centerville, Minnesota
SUTTON TRANSPORT
09/03/21
10
Weston, WI 54476-0378
8011 Schofield Avenue
of
SUTTON TRANSPORT, INC
Joseph T. Radach, P.E.
SITE PLAN
C3
REVISIONS 1. 09/03/21 ISSUED FOR PERMITDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:
Name:Signature:Date:09/03/21License #:45889
I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State
of Minnesota
R
Know what's
f:\\jobs\\9441 - 9460\\9443 - sutton transport - centerville\\cad c3d\\engineering\\9443_utility.dwg09/03/21Save Date:
JTRJTR
Centerville, Minnesota
SUTTON TRANSPORT
09/03/21
10
Weston, WI 54476-0378
8011 Schofield Avenue
of
SUTTON TRANSPORT, INC
Joseph T. Radach, P.E.
UTILITY PLAN
C4
REVISIONS 1. 09/03/21 ISSUED FOR PERMITDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:
Name:Signature:Date:09/03/21License #:45889
I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State
of Minnesota
R
Know what's
f:\\jobs\\9441 - 9460\\9443 - sutton transport - centerville\\cad c3d\\engineering\\9443_grade.dwg09/03/21Save Date:
JTRJTR
Centerville, Minnesota
SUTTON TRANSPORT
09/03/21
10
Weston, WI 54476-0378
8011 Schofield Avenue
of
SUTTON TRANSPORT, INC
EROSION CONTROL PLAN
Joseph T. Radach, P.E.
GRADING, DRAINAGE, &
C5
REVISIONS 1. 09/03/21 ISSUED FOR PERMITDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:
Name:Signature:Date:09/03/21License #:45889
I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State
of Minnesota
R
Know what's
f:\\jobs\\9441 - 9460\\9443 - sutton transport - centerville\\cad c3d\\engineering\\9443_details.dwg06/21/21Save Date:
JTRJTR
Centerville, Minnesota
SUTTON TRANSPORT
09/03/21
10
Weston, WI 54476-0378
8011 Schofield Avenue
of
SUTTON TRANSPORT, INC
Joseph T. Radach, P.E.
DETAILS
C7
REVISIONS 1. 09/03/21 ISSUED FOR PERMITDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:
Name:Signature:Date:09/03/21License #:45889
I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Professional Engineer under thelaws of the State
of Minnesota
VAN
PARKING
REQUIRED
VEHICLE I D
FOR VIOLATIONACCESSIBLE
UP TO $200 FINE
f:\\jobs\\9441 - 9460\\9443 - sutton transport - centerville\\cad c3d\\landscape\\9443_landscape.dwg09/03/21Save Date:
RJRRJR
Centerville, Minnesota
56346
SUTTON TRANSPORT
09/03/21
3
Weston, WI 54476-0378
8011 Schofield Avenue
of
SUTTON TRANSPORT, INC
Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA
LANDSCAPE PLAN
L1
REVISIONS 1. 09/03/21 ISSUED FOR PERMITDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:
Name:Signature:Date:09/03/21License #:
I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the State of
Minnesota.
R
Know what's
f:\\jobs\\9441 - 9460\\9443 - sutton transport - centerville\\cad c3d\\landscape\\9443_landscape.dwg09/03/21Save Date:
RJRRJR
Centerville, Minnesota
56346
SUTTON TRANSPORT
09/03/21
3
Weston, WI 54476-0378
8011 Schofield Avenue
of
SUTTON TRANSPORT, INC
Ryan J. Ruttger, RLA
LANDSCAPE PLAN
L2
REVISIONS 1. 09/03/21 ISSUED FOR PERMITDRAWN BY:DESIGNED BY:ISSUE DATE:
Name:Signature:Date:09/03/21License #:
I hereby certify that this plan, specificationor report was prepared by me or under mydirect supervision and that I am a dulyLicensed Landscape Architect under thelaws of the State of
Minnesota.
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: Requested Council Meeting Date:
October 27, 2021
City Administrator / City Attorney
VIII.1.b
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Conditional Use Permit for Sutton Transport Plat
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
Sutton will operate a "Truck Terminal". Code requires a CUP with condition to govern its operation.
Planning and Zoning Commission recommend granting this CUP with the conditions stated in the attached
document.
Sutton Transport will need to review the final version of the CUP and may request minor revision. The attached
Resolution adopts the CUP and grants the City Attorney authority to make minor revisions which do not alter
the intent of the document.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
Paid by Sutton Transportation
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
Motion to approve the attached Resolution granting the Conditional Use Permit.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
_____
_____
Other (specify) ____________
_____ _____ Love
_____ _____
_______________________________________________________________
_____ _____ Koski
_____ _____ Montain _______________________________________________________________
Administration Department Use:
Refer to: _________________________________
Consent
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Regular
Other: ___________________________________
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
COUNTY OF ANOKA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION #21-____
A RESOLUTION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
FOR SUTTON TRANSPORT
WHEREAS, the City of Centerville Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the City
Council grant Sutton Transport a Conditional Use Permit to operate a truck terminal.
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it would be in the best interest of the City to
Grant the attached Conditional Use Permit.
WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes the City Attorney to make amendments to the Conditional
Use Permit as necessary such that they do not change or alter the intent of the Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Centerville City Council does hereby, approve
the attached Conditional Use Permit.
th
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 27 day of October 2021 by the City Council of the City
of Centerville.
________________________________
D. Love, Mayor
Attest:
____________________________________
Teresa Bender, City Clerk
_____________________________________________________________________________________
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
ANOKA COUNTY, MINNESOTA
APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein, the City of Centerville hereby
grants approval of a CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT for the SUBJECT PROPERTY on the behalf
of the LANDOWNER.
The Permit allows the Landowner to:
Develop, construct, and operate a Truck Terminal subject to the conditions
stated herein.
This Permit governs tProperty
Sutton Transport Plat, located in the City of Centerville, County of Anoka
County, and the State of Minnesota.
Formerly described as the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter,
Section 24, Township 31, Range 22, except the East 410 feet of the South 345
feet thereof, Anoka County, Minnesota. Except the south 342.75 feet of the
Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter of Section 24, Township 31,
Range 22, lying Westerly of the East 410.00 feet thereof, Anoka County,
Minnesota. Except that part platted as Royal Industrial Park, Anoka County
Minnesota. Abstract property.
This Permit is . At the time of this application the
Landowner is:
Sutton Properties, L.L.C., a Wisconsin limited liability company.
The Parties agree that this Permit shall operate and enjoin the City, the Subject
Property, and the Landowner to the terms and condition stated herein. The Ordinances
of the City of Centerville and the State of Minnesota govern the Subject Property and the
Landowner. The Landowner is responsible to enforce the conditions of this Permit upon
any owner of the land or shareholder thereof, any person or entity entering upon the
Subject Property, or any employee, partner, contractor, heir, or assignee of the
Landowner.
1
Centerville Conditional Use Permit
Version 10/22/2021
FINDINGS OF FACT FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
The Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council made these Findings of Fact
in support of the recommendation and approval of this Conditional Use Permit:
1) The proposed use as a truck terminal is an appropriate use within
Industrial District.
2) The City has standards for parking, landscaping, lighting, building materials, and
other elements in the zoning code which are reasonably appropriate to
encourage high quality development in the City.
3) The proposed use by the Landowner provides for reasonable and adequate
parking, landscaping, building design, lighting, screening of outdoor parking and
storage, and other issues.
4) The project as proposed meets the criteria for granting a Conditional Use Permit in
Section 156.320 of the Zoning Code.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CONDITIONS
The City of Centerville hereby grants the Subject Property and Landowner a
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT to develop, construct, maintain, and operate a truck terminal,
subject to the following conditions:
1) Landowner shall construct and maintain the Subject Property and improvements
contained thereon in accordance with the approved plans, which are attached
as exhibits, and hereby incorporated as conditions of this Permit. These plans are
entitled:
a. Site Plan (1 page)
b. Outside Storage Exhibit (1 page)
c. Landscape Plan (3 pages)
2) Landowner shall construct and maintain the Subject Property and improvements
contained thereon in accordance with Building Plans as approved by the City.
3) Parking Limitations:
a. Vehicles, tractors, and trailers frequenting, using, or visiting the Subject
Property:
i. may only park in marked and painted parking stalls; or
ii. may park where necessary when located adjacent to a dock door.
b. Parking for passenger vehicles and employees is only allowed in the
northern parking lot as indicated on the Outside Storage Exhibit;
c. Tractors, trailers, and other commercial delivery vehicles may only park in
areas indicated for outside storage as indicated in the Outside Storage
2
Centerville Conditional Use Permit
Version 10/22/2021
Exhibit, except when located adjacent to a dock door of the building.
d. Except for locations described in this section, parking is not permitted
anywhere else within the Subject Property or on any roadway in the City of
Centerville.
4) Users of the Subject Property will produce no noise, vibrations, air pollution, light
pollution, fire hazards or noxious emissions which will disturb or endanger
neighboring properties.
5) Users of the Subject Property will create no act of public nuisance or disorderly
State Law.
6) Landowner will follow the applicable standards and requirements of the City of
Centerville City Code, Rice Creek Watershed District, Anoka County, Army Corp
of Engineers, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Minnesota Department
of Natural Resources, and any other agency having jurisdiction over the Subject
Property.
7) Landowner will obey all laws and regulation necessary to operate this truck
terminal, and will obtain and maintain, in good standing, all licenses or permits
necessary to operate this type of facility.
8) Miscellaneous conditions:
a. Trash: Screening of the trash enclosure will be reviewed and approved by
the City.
b. Outdoor Lighting: Outdoor lighting shall consist of downcast lighting fixtures
as approved by the City.
c. Signage: Signage for the project will be reviewed and approved by the
City.
9) The Landowner is responsible for all of the conditions set forth in this Permit.
10) In addition to all civil penalties and remedies for violation of this Permit, violation
of this Permit is a misdemeanor criminal offense.
3
Centerville Conditional Use Permit
Version 10/22/2021
N
N
O
I
O
A
I
L
T
I
T
A
P
T
P
E
E
D
E
C
C
X
X
E
E
A
L
I
A
T
E
D
E
E
S
H
T
U
O
S
E
U
N
E
V
A
N
T
S
O
1
I
2
T
P
E
SUTTON TRANSPORT
C
X
E
AF
IVRI
WE
RTS
TEE
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: Requested Council Meeting Date:
October 27, 2021
Administration
IX.1
TITLE OF ISSUE:
2021 Anoka County 2021 Classification List - Forfeiture of The Shores Outlot A (PIN #R15-31-22-43-0016)
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
Annually the County notifies the City of Tax Forfeitures. The City has received notification that The Shores
Outlot A (PIN #R15-31-22-43-0016. The County is ascertaining whether special assessments need to be
certified to the parcel, whether buildable, the cits interest in acquiring, desiring an easement over or
whether i should be sold to an abutting property owner.
Staff is looking for direction.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
Not applicable at this time.
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
Council can either acquire or state that the parcel would be best suited to be combined with parcel
#R15-31-22-43-0003 - 7397 Main Street - Anoka County's maintenance facility.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
_____
_____
Letter from Anoka County dated 10/11/2021.
Other (specify) ____________
_____ _____
_____
_____
_______________________________________________________________
_____ _____Ki
_____ ____________________________________________________________________
Administration Department Use:
Refer to: _________________________________
Consent
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Regular
Other: ___________________________________
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
REQUEST FOR
COUNCIL ACTION
Agenda Item # Department: Requested Council Meeting Date:
October 27, 2021
Engineering/Public Works
IX.2
TITLE OF ISSUE:
Wellhead Protection Joint Powers Agreement
BACKGROUND AND SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION:
Centerville has been a part of a Joint Powers organization focused on implementation of Wellhead Protection
Plans. Many activities identified in these plans can be done by the JPA rather than each city completing the
task individually. The JPA agreement is about 10 years old and needed some updating. Attached is a revised
JPA for consideration. See attached memo for additional background information.
COST AND SOURCE(S) OF FUNDING:
N/A
REQUESTED COUNCIL ACTION:
Motion to approve the revised Joint Powers Agreement for Wellhead Protection.
For ClerkÓs Use:
SUPPORTED DOCUMENTS ATTACHED
Motion By: ____________________________________
Resolution Ordinance Contract Minutes Plan Map
Second By: ____________________________________
Vote Record: Aye Nay
_____
_____
JPA (Revised), Letter from JPA administrator
Other (specify) ____________
_____ _____
_____
_____
_______________________________________________________________
_____ _____Ki
_____ ____________________________________________________________________
Administration Department Use:
Refer to: _________________________________
Consent
Tabled Until: ______________________________
Regular
Other: ___________________________________
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
Anoka County Municipal Wellhead Protection Implementation
Joint Powers Agreement
(Amended and Restated)
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into with the express purpose to amend and
restate the Implementation Joint Powers Agreements between some of the parties from 2010 and
2014, and is made by and between the cities of Andover, Anoka, Blaine, Centerville, Circle Pines,
Columbus, Coon Rapids, East Bethel, Fridley, Lexington, Lino Lakes, Ramsey, Spring Lake Park,
and St. Francis (hereinafter referred to as "Cities") and the County of Anoka (hereinafter referred
to as "County"), each acting by and through its governing body, pursuant to MN Stat. §471.59
providing for the joint exercise of powers. The Cities and the County are collectively referred to
herein as the ÐpartiesÑ. Each of the Cities individually, and separately the County individually, is
sometimes referred to herein as a ÐpartyÑ.
RECITALS
1. Pursuant to Minnesota Rule subp. 4720.5130 and the Minnesota Department of Health, the
Cities, as public water suppliers, are required to prepare wellhead protection plans for their
community water supplies. Some of the Cities outlined above entered into a Wellhead
Protection Joint Powers Agreement in 1997 for purposes of developing the required plans.
The group entered into an Implementation JPA in 2010 and 2014 to allow additional cities
to join.
2. The County is committed to enhancing water resources protection and public health and
finds it in the County's interest to facilitate and partner with the Cities.
3. The Cities and County desire to continue to coordinate their efforts to protect their well water
supply for their communities and to implement the common elements of their wellhead
protection plans jointly through efficient and cost effective cooperation among members.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements contained herein, and in exercise
of the powers granted by MN Stat. § 471.59, the parties to this Agreement agree as follows:
1. PURPOSE
1.1. The Cities and County agree that they have joined together to:
1.1.1. implement common elements of their wellhead protection plans;
1.1.2. establish a joint user group to address activities related to this agreement;
1
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
1.1.3. authorize the County to act as facilitator and as agent contracting for any consultant
services or applying for any grants. Pursuant to § 6.4 County shall be fiscal agent
for any pooled funds;
1.1.4. allocate costs; and
1.1.5. receive and disburse grants.
2. TERM
2.1. This agreement shall be effective upon the date of the last required signature and shall
continue until terminated as provided herein.
2.2. Additional cities located in Anoka County who are public water suppliers may join this
Agreement following the effective date. A city shall become a full member of this Joint
Powers Agreement upon receipt of a Resolution by the Governing Board of the City, that
authorizes the cityÓs participation in, and decision to be bound by the terms of, this
Agreement. No formal Addendum to this Agreement is necessary.
2.3. If a city joins after the effective date, that city is responsible for its proportionate share of
any expenses incurred in implementing this Agreement for which the city will receive a
benefit.
3. ANOKA COUNTY MUNICIPAL WELLHEAD GROUP
3.1. The governing body of each of the Cities shall appoint one representative to serve as a
member of the Anoka County Municipal Wellhead Protection Group (hereinafter
"Group").
3.2. One alternate member shall be appointed to the Group by the governing body of the Cities.
The alternate may attend any meeting of the Group and, when the regular member is
absent, vote on behalf of the City the member represents.
3.3.All members of the Group shall serve at the will and pleasure of the appointing authority.
The appointing authority shall notify the Anoka County Administrator of the member or
alternate member appointed to the Group and shall notify the Anoka County Administrator
of any changes to their appointment.
3.4. Group members shall not be entitled to compensation or reimbursement for expenses
incurred in attending meetings, except to the extent that the appointing authority might
determine to compensate or reimburse the expenses of the member it appoints, in which
case the obligation to make such payments shall be that of the appointing authority.
2
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
3.5. The County's Environmental Services Manager or its designee shall be an ex-officio non-
voting member of the Group and shall serve as the facilitator to the Group.
3.6. The Group shall meet at regular intervals as determined by the Group.
3.7. A majority of all Group voting members shall constitute a quorum, but less than a quorum
may adjourn a scheduled meeting.
4. GROUP RESPONSIBILITIES
4.1. The Group shall be responsible to:
4.1.1. develop and update a work plan to perform joint wellhead protection activities;
4.1.2. develop programs to achieve common wellhead education and protection
objectives;
4.1.3. recommend to the governing bodies and seek necessary approval of the Cities and
County prior to expenditure of funds, whether to have the County contract with a
consultant under the terms of this Agreement;
4.1.4. apply for funds from any source it may identify and utilize the funds for the benefit
of participating cities; and
4.1.5. perform the activities as outlined in Section 5. Joint Powers Activities.
5. JOINT POWERS ACTIVITIES
5.1. Activities authorized by this agreement are to:
5.1.1. Investigate methods and costs to jointly implement wellhead protection activities.
5.1.2. Determine the process in which joint wellhead protection activities will be
implemented.
5.1.3. Request consultant(s) qualifications and proposals to implement part or the entire
Group's work plan.
5.1.4. Seek grants and other methods to fund implementation of the Group's wellhead
protection activities.
5.1.5. Establish the apportioned costs for each City to jointly implement the common
elements indicated in their wellhead protection plans.
5.1.6. Identify a fiscal agent for any joint funds received and to be expended.
3
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
5.2. The Group has developed a work plan to carry out orderly wellhead protection activities.
The Group will periodically review the work plan and update it as necessary to efficiently
meet the needs of the parties.
5.3. Prior to implementation of each wellhead protection project, the Group Facilitator will
send notice to the Cities of the cost identified for the project. Within thirty (30) days of
receipt of the notice, each city must either send a letter to the Group Facilitator indicating
the city's interest in participation in the project or notify the other parties of its intention to
refrain from participation in the project. In the event a city fails to indicate a reply, that
city shall be deemed to have declined to participate in the project.
5.4. If one or more city chooses to refrain from participation following receipt of notice
provided in 5.3, the Group Facilitator will recalculate the costs identified with participation
in the project and send notice of the recalculated cost to the remaining cities. If identified
costs increase by more than 10%, each of the remaining cities will have thirty (30) days to
reconsider participation in the project. If a city chooses to withdraw, the city must send
the Group Facilitator a letter, within the ten day period, indicating the city will refrain from
participation in the project. If an additional city or cities choose to withdraw, the Group
will reevaluate the work plan and associated costs before sending a new notice under 5.3.
5.5. If the proposed project will benefit a city that desires to refrain from the project and that
city cannot be removed from the project, and a majority of the Group affirm moving
forward, that city may not refrain from participation.
6. FUNDING
6.1. Costs of for the Group's wellhead protection projects shall be allocated to each member
city based on the proportion that each city's factors represent the total factor of all
participating cities. The factors to be used shall be equally weighted and apportioned
relevant to its presence and impact on each member party's wellhead plan goals.
6.2. The costs to be allocated to the cities shall be reduced by the amount of any grants received
before allocation of the costs.
6.3. Each city will make payment of its pro-rata share for authorized activity expense to the
County.
6.4. Funds paid by the Cities or received from any other source shall be managed by the County
as fiscal agent.
6.5. Payments from the Cities must be received by the County before the County will incur any
fiscal obligation.
4
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
6.6. All funds disbursed by the County pursuant to this Agreement shall be disbursed in a
manner that is consistent with the method provided by law.
6.7. A strict accounting shall be made of all funds and a report of all receipts and disbursements
shall be made by the County upon request.
7. COUNTY SERVICES
7.1. The County shall provide services to facilitate and assist the Group in the conduct of its
affairs. The Environmental Services unit of the Anoka County Public Health and
Environmental Services Department shall provide these services.
7.2. The County shall serve as fiscal agent for the Group for the purpose of receiving and
dispersing funds as authorized by the Group and entering into contracts or grant
applications on behalf of the Group.
7.3. The County shall maintain records and documents relating to matters that are the subject
of this agreement. All such records shall be retained for a period of at least three years
after termination of this agreement and, upon request of any party, shall be retained for
any additional period requested. The records shall be available to inspection, review and
audit by the parties and the State Auditor as provided by law during regular business hours.
8. CONTRACTS
8.1. Contracts and grant applications made pursuant to this Agreement shall be made by the
County and shall conform to the requirements applicable to the County.
9. NONDISCRIMINATION AND COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
9.1. In accordance with the County's Affirmative Action Plan and the County Commissioners'
policy against discrimination, no person shall illegally, on the grounds of race, color,
religion, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, public assistance status, handicap, age, or
national origin, be excluded from full employment rights in, participation in, be denied
benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under and program, service or
activity hereunder in accordance with the provisions of any and all applicable federal and
state laws against discrimination.
9.2. During the performance of this Agreement, the Group and its agents shall comply with all
applicable laws, ordinances, and regulations, including federal, state and local
nondiscrimination regulations.
10. WITHDRAWAL
5
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
10.1. Any party shall have the right to withdraw from this Agreement in the following manner:
The governing body of the withdrawing party shall pass a resolution declaring its intention
to withdraw effective on a specified date, which date shall not be less than thirty (30) days
from the date of the resolution, and shall send a copy of the resolution to each party's
governing body not less than thirty (30) days before the effective date of withdrawal.
10.2. Withdrawal by a party shall not result in the discharge of any legal or financial liability
incurred by that party before the effective date of withdrawal.
11. TERMINATION
11.1. This Agreement may be terminated upon mutual agreement of the parties by a joint
resolution passed by the parties' governing bodies.
11.2. This Agreement shall terminate if, due to the withdrawal of parties, there are less than four
remaining parties.
12. DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTY
12.1. Upon termination of this Agreement, any remaining funds or property acquired under the
terms of this Agreement shall be distributed to the cities in proportion to the respective
contribution of the cities.
12.2. Upon termination of this Agreement, any payments due and owning or other unfulfilled
financial obligations of a member party shall continue to be a lawful obligation of the
party.
13. NOTICE
13.1. For purpose of notices to be given under this agreement, notices shall be directed as set
forth:
Andover City Council Anoka City Council Anoka County Board of
Commissioners
2015 First Ave. N.
Anoka County Government
Anoka, MN 55303
Center
2100 Third Avenue
Anoka, MN 55303
Blaine City Council Centerville City Council Circle Pines City Council
10801 Town Square Drive 1880 Main Street
6
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
Blaine, MN 55449 Centerville, MN 55038-9794
Columbus Township Coon Rapids City Council East Bethel City Council
st
11155 Robinson Drive 2241 221 Ave NE
Coon Rapids, MN 55433-East Bethel, MN 55011
3761
Fridley City Council Lexington City Council Lino Lakes City Council
6431 University Avenue NE 9180 Lexington Avenue
Fridley, MN 55432 Lexington, MN 55014
Ramsey City Council Spring Lake Park City St. Francis City Council
Council
7550 Sunwood Dr. NW
st
1301 81 Avenue NE
Ramsey, MN 55303
Spring Lake Park, MN
55432
14. LIABILITY
14.1. Each party will be responsible for its own acts and behavior and the results thereof and
shall not be responsible or liable for any other partyÓs actions and consequences of those
actions. The Minnesota Municipal Tort Claims Act, Minn. Stat. Ch. 466, governs the
partiesÓ liability. For actions taken on behalf of the Group, for purposes of determining
total liability for damages, the participating governmental units and the joint board, if one
is established, are considered a single governmental unit and the total liability for the
participating governmental units and the joint board, if established, shall not exceed the
limits on governmental liability for a single governmental unit.
15. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
15.1. This joint powers agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties on the matter
related hereto.
15.2. This agreement shall not be altered or amended, except by agreement in writing signed by
the parties hereto.
15.3. The Group may recommend amendments to this agreement to the governing bodies of the
parties for their consideration.
16. SIGNATURES
16.1. All parties to this Agreement need not sign the same copy of the Agreement.
7
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
16.2. An original Agreement signed by each party to this Agreement shall be maintained in the
Office of the Anoka County Attorney.
The remainder of this page intentionally left blank
8
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
COUNTY OF ANOKA
By:
Rhonda Sivarajah
Anoka County Administrator
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
Assistant Anoka County Attorney
9
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF ANDOVER
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
10
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF ANOKA
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
11
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF BLAINE
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
12
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF CENTERVILLE
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
13
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF CIRCLE PINES
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
14
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF COLUMBUS
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
15
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF COON RAPIDS
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
16
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF EAST BETHEL
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
17
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF FRIDLEY
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
18
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF LEXINGTON
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
19
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF LINO LAKES
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
20
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF RAMSEY
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
21
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF SPRING LAKE PARK
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
22
VersionUpdated5/3/21AnokaCountyC000____
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date stated below:
CITY OF ST. FRANCIS
By:
Its:
Dated:
By:
Its:
Dated:
Approved as to Form and Execution:
By:
City Attorney
23
memo
DATE: October 15, 2021
TO: Paul Palzer
Centerville Community Public Water Supply
FROM: Steve Robertson
Supervisor, Source Water Protection Unit
SUBJECT: Statewide PFAS Monitoring Project
Below please find your system’s sampling results for the Statewide PFAS Monitoring Project.
Sampling was conducted on 8/31/21.
Sampling results
Sample location PFAS Contaminant detected Concentration ( /L) MDH Health Value
(/L)
Well #2 Entry Point PFBA 0.0059 7
1
PFBA was detected in the sample at a level of 0.0059 micrograms per liter (µg/L). This is below
the health-based guidance value of 7 µg/L. A person drinking water at or below the guidance
value would have little or no risk for health effects.
Perfluorobutyrate, or perfluorobutanoic acid, (PFBA) is one of a group of related chemicals
known as perfluorinated alkylated substances (PFAS). This group of chemicals is commonly used
in non-stick and stain-resistant consumer products, food packaging, fire-fighting foam, and
industrial processes. PFBA can bea breakdown product of other PFAS.PFBA moves easily
through the environment and is widely detected in groundwater, surface water and in nature.
PFBA is the most commonly detected PFAS in Minnesota waters. PFBA is commonly found in
drinking water at low levels.
For more information on PFBA, visit
https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/risk/docs/guidance/gw/pfbainfo.p
df
For more information on PFAS visit
https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/hazardous/topics/pfcs.html
1
One microgram per liter is the same as one part per billion (ppb).
1
STATEWIDE PFAS MONITORING RESULTS
Next Steps
Since PFAS sampling is not required by the EPA, you are not required to include these results in
your consumer confidence report (CCR). However, MDH recommends that you include them in
your next CCR and can provide resources to help you give context about what these results
mean.
About the project
MDH has been studyingthe potential health impacts of PFASin groundwater in Minnesota
since 2002. This project is part of a larger effort at MDH to sample all community water systems
(CWSs) for PFAS. MDH aims to cover 90% of CWS customers under its PFAS monitoring program by
2025. The project has been made possible through funding from the Clean Water Fund and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.Sampling results from all systems that participated in the
study will be included in an interactive mapping application on the MDH website. MDH will also
be providing these results to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to make them aware of
the contamination.
For more information about the PFAS monitoring in Minnesota, please visit PFAS Testing of
Public Water Systems
(https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/pfas.html).
For more information about Phase I of this project, see the infosheet Statewide PFAS
Monitoring Project (PDF)
(https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/docs/statewidepfas.pdf).
If you have any questions about the results, please contact Jane de Lambert, the Project
Manager, at 612-247-8367.
cc: Brian Noma, MDH District Engineer
Attachment
Minnesota Department of Health
PO Box 64975
St. Paul, MN 55164-0975
651-201-4700
health.drinkingwater@state.mn.us
www.health.state.mn.us
10/15/2021
To obtain this information in a different format, call: 651-201-4700.
2
Mark Statz
From:Wojski, Eddie (MDH) <eddie.wojski@state.mn.us>
Sent:Tuesday, October 19, 2021 1:42 PM
To:Mark Statz
Subject:City of Centerville; MN Dept. of Health Implementation Grant Application Results
Caution:Thisemailoriginatedoutsideourorganization;pleaseusecaution.
HiMark,
YouappliedforaSourceWaterProtectionImplementationGrantonbehalfofCityofCentervilleinSeptember2021.
CityofCentervillereceivedthepointsneededtoreceiveagrantandisontheprioritywaitlist. Availability of grant
funds have been exhausted and your application is placed on a waiting list.TheSourceWaterProtection
year.Iwillcontactyouwhenfundsbecomeavailable.
programanticipatesthatfundswillbeavailablesometimethis
Oncefundsbecomeavailable,youwillreceiveagrantagreementviaemailforyourreviewandsignature.OnceIreceive
yoursignedgrantagreement,IwillthenforwardtoourFinancialManagementDept.forfinalexecution.
Itisveryimportantthatyoudonotbeginanyworkorincuranyexpensesuntilyoureceiveanexecutedgrantagreement
signedbyyouandtheStateofMinnesota.
IfyourgrantagreementstatestheneedforPlanReview,youwillneedtocontactDavidWeum,MinnesotaDepartment
ofHealth(MDH)PlanReviewEngineerat6512014684ordavid.weum@state.mn.usforplanreviewprocessand
information.
Note:MDHDOESNOTreimbursefundsforWellandSealingpermitfees.
Youmaybeginworkandstartincurringexpensesforyourprojectonceyoureceiveafullyexecutedgrantagreement.
Yourgrantagreementwillexpire12/15/2022.Ilookforwardtoworkingwithyouthroughthisentiregrantprocess.Feel
freetocontactmewithanyquestions.
EddieWojski
InterimGrantCoordinator
DrinkingWaterProtection
POBox64975
St.Paul,MN551640977
Office:6512014576
To help protect your To help protect your To help protect your To help protect your To help protect your
privacy, Microsoft privacy, Microsoft privacy, Microsoft privacy, Microsoft privacy, Microsoft
Office prevented Office prevented Office prevented Office prevented Office prevented
automatic download automatic download automatic download automatic download automatic download
of this picture from of this picture from of this picture from of this picture from of this picture from
the Internet.the Internet.the Internet.the Internet.the Internet.
http://www.health.sthttp://www.health.sthttp://www.health.sthttp://www.health.sthttp://www.health.st
ate.mn.us/images/icate.mn.us/images/icate.mn.us/images/icate.mn.us/images/icate.mn.us/images/ic
onfb.gifontwitter.gifonlinkedin.gifoninstragram.gifonyoutube.gif
1