2006_1016_Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

of the vehicle, could restnre $i37 million annually io the Highway Usear Ta�c Distributaan �'�nd (HUTDFj, wk�ieh is then distributed to �ie st�te, counties and eities per the corastit�t�ona] �ormula. This wauld be�efit the cit�y to some degree but r�ot ta the extent of a gas �c increase. Street Utility �z Januazy of 2003, CEAM, the Maz�zaesata Chapter oi the American Public Works Assaciatipn (APWA), and the Leag��e af Minnesata Cities (LMC), published a repart e�tit�ed: "Funding Slreet Cons�ruetion and Mainte�anee in Minnesota'S Cl$I�S." This report clearly defit�ed and quantified munieipal transpartation �eeds and the significance ofthe fi�nding inadequacies. T�e �repart made a number of recornrnendatio�,s ira.cluc�i�ng adopfion of �nabling legisla�ion that would a.�aw cities, thro�gh a p�o�ss of p�zblic hea�ir�gs, pla�a development, and city cn�.rr�cil action, ta eanact a Sireet U�ility, sira�ailar � the water, sewer, and staz�rra. drai.�age utilities alread� in place. This s�t utiliiy coulci charge residen�s a�'ee sui�cient ta implemeni each a�ual camponent oian approved 5-yea7r plar� based on their usage o£ ihe slreei system. The original coz�cepi was �o do �t�is base.� on caiculated t� ip genera�ian ra�s assigned to �arious categflr�es of land us�s. The trip genera�inn eoncept was coolly received by Minnesota legislators, be�au5e it was co�,sidered too complex to ac�ninister e£�xcien�.y and toa re�ssive with respe�ct to ability tn pay. Wi�ile the street u�ility cnnc.�pt still zzaakes sense, there are o�ier funcling zxa�ck�anism that, when inie�rated inta the cancept, r.an be mad� available to cities �o gen�rate the reven�xes necessa�.y to suppnrt their street�. Tr� fact, �egislative authority enabiing ciiies tn pielc frtim a menu of funcling op�ions wauld ma�Y'rmize the effective�ess of the street utility since populatian, street rr�ile.age aa�d condiiion, land-use campositinn, and econoznic vitality va�y si�nificantly fraarz� czty to city. These graups rec�u�s� that the Minnesaia l.egislature, i� 20q7 sessinn, adopt enabling le�isla�� authoz�zing a� eities to enact a street �tiiity, with addi�ionat authorization. to e�tabiish and utilize arry nr all of the fo�.nwixig funcling rnecha�zsms to s�zpport implementation of #1�eir 5�ear Capi� �npravement and Main�enance Plans: 1. Au�liorize all cities io enact a s�r�z ui��ty, to be fi�rided as det�rmined by theix cxty councils, froin any cornb'vnat�an o�mechanisms as reeoz�nmended herein. 2. Aiztharize a local ap�ian sales � for all iz�carporaied Miru7esota ci�ics af �/2 percent declicated to iransporta�ion The pu�pose of t�ais �oney woulci be to support the construc�ion, maintenance, and aperations of city streets not eligible �ar NISAS iundan�, an� to prov�ide a revenue strea�n fc�r ei�y contributians required for projects of regional significance. Eraac�nent ofthiis sales t� op�on by a Minri�sota city should be ca�tuagent upon appro��aie public naticce, public he�rczng, and develc�pment a�ad ada��an of 5-year Capital �prav�ment ar�c� Maintenarzce �'lans. Enactment by a city cowrzcil of the lQCal option sales taa� for �portation woulc� 3�e effective for the 5-year period cc�vered by the S-year CIP and Main�enanr,e Plan, and eould be reneweci on an anr�ual baszs as part of�lie S-year Plaxa a�endmeni prnc�s. While Roseville do�s have an in place shrreet infiastr�cture fund, additiozaal revenue frnrn a s�ree� utility fee ax �aeal option sales tax would allaw the Ciiy to leverage doilaz�s far staie and co�u�ty system� proje.cts to improve the re�ioz�al t�ranssportation neiwork and i�prove safety in Roseville. Attachment C