HomeMy WebLinkAbout8.b. Legislative Issues Package a � •
f P� BQX 510
j�� � 2875-145TH ST. W.
/� �`A/� RpSEMQUNT.MINNESOTA 5506$
llSQ I I'E�V��� 612-A23-4411
'��� � Q
T0: Mayor, Napper V �
Councilmembers Klassen
Oxborough
Willcox
W�PPermann
FROM: Stephan Jilk
DATE: December 29, 1989
RE: 1990 Legislative Issues Statements
Attached please find the Position Statements on several issues
for consideration by the 1990 state legislature. These issues
and proposed position statements come to you through discussion
held at staff level by Dakota County cities and Dakota County
staff.
Each year city and county administrators discuss issues they feel
are important to their cities and Dakota County as a whole and
then work to develop position statements on the issues to present
to state legislators which represent Dakota County.
The positions will be reviewed by all city councils and the
county board before they are finalized and presented at a
breakfast meeting on February 2 to the local Iegislators. All
issues which cities and Dakota County feel should be addressed
are not considered in this manner. Many issues relevant or
important to just one city or just Dakota County may be addressed
by the individual party. The approach taken here is one that
allows an entire county, represented individually through its
cities and as a whole by the county, to present a legislative
package" to its legislative dele�ation to consider„and, to be
considered as a ''united approach ' by those constituents they
represent.
Please review these issues and position statements . I will
expand on them for further discussion and hope for approvai at
the meeting.
dw
f`bV 15 '�'9 11�45 DAKUTH l:lY i Y h'M1fbltrFiL utvtLt�t'�•ittr� ' �" '-
: � � • DAKQTA Ct�tlN'TY i�IANA&ERS •
Positian Statement
COt�l7Y StATE AID QISTRIBUTION FORMi�A
BACK6ROUND
� The constitutional amenc�nent that gaverns the distribution of the Hlghway
Users Fund was ado�0�dtatelroads�29%�todbe distributedtto tounty roads�andn9x
to be distributed .
to tity roads.
The distributton of these fund s amonq the county and city road systems is
qover�ed by both statute a�nd sdministrative rule. For a variety of reasons
the distrfibution of the tity funds h�s co�tinued to meet the thang�ng needs of
cities and th� population growth �nd has resulted in a farmul� that
distributes approximately 80x of the city state a9d highway funds to cit9es in
the seven county metropolftan area. Changes in the distribvtion for the
County State Aid Highway (CSAH) funds, however, have not followed the
population growth, and as a result, we find that today only about 17.7� of the
CSAH funds are distributed to counties i� the seven county metropolitan area.
Because virtually a11 of Dakota County's use of CSAN funds are- expended within
the various cities in Oakota County and the resulting improvements to the
caunty road system is a direct b�nefft to the cities in Dakota County, it
wouid be beneficial ta both Dakota County and cities of Oakota County to bring
about a more equitable distrlbution af CSAH funds.
The current statutory distributiorr formula is as foilows:
10� equally to the 87 counties
id� based on the ntmber of vehicles regjstered
30% the number of miles of CSAN roads
50� on need as determined by the Screening Committee
The Screening Comnittee is made up of one representative from each of the 9
State Highway Districts of which there are 2 in the seven county metro are�.
The defini�ion of need is mafnly spelled out in a�dministrative rule, but ,
proposed revlsions are dtscussed t�nd voted on by the members af the Screening
Conm'ittee whjch is dominated by the rural part of Minnesota.
RECQMMENQATION
- Modify the current statutory distribution formula as follows:
iQ� equaliy to the 87 counties
30� based on the number of vehiCles registered
30� the number of miles of CSAH roads
30� on need as determined by the Screening Comn�ttee
- Assign greater priority to the nc�nber of vehicles req�istered, and reduce
the importance of the aeeds factar.
- �xpand membership ffthe urbanecounttesm(over 175,000 p�pulation��n� a
member from each o
- Base fundfng on lane miles rather than Ceriter line miles.
LEGIS-HWY
4 • •
ROAD IMPACT FEES
Position Statement
�
BACKGROUND:
. Local governments are using a variety of techniques to privatelg
. f inance pubiic infrastructure. One such technique is impact fees.
An i.mpact fee can be defined as, "single payment(s) required to be
made by builders or� developers at the time of development approval
and calculated to be the proportionate share of the capital cost of
providing major facilties (arterial roads, int�rceptor sewers, � •
. sewage treatment plants, regional parks, etc. ) to that development. "
Impact fees under this definition are currently not legal in the
State of Minnesota. Attempts have been made in the last few years
to pass iegislation in the Minnesota Legislature that would enable
cities and counties to impose a road access eharge (a form of an
impact fe.e) to all new developments. Proposals have been made in
the past that would allow cities to. assess a fee up to .$750 per
single family home against all new developments based ugon the
number of vehicle trips that the project generated. This
iegislation was introduced in the 1987 and the 1988 legislative
sessions.
Supporters of enabling legislation believe that legislation allowing
cities to collect a road access charge would provide cities with a
much needed additional source of funding to help keep the arterial
• and collector street systems cToser to fulfilling their �
transportation needs. By collecting a road access charge at up to
$750 per single family home for new or expanded land use, it spreads
the cost of part of the arterial/collector street system over a� �
� larger area of a city since the .new or .expanded land use would pay
regardless of whether it was actually located adjaeent to the
arterial/collector street. We believe that the ci.ties of Dakota
County, facing extreme growth and fiscal stress, need the additional.
revenue that would become available to it as a result of a road
access fee. - ---
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1: Support the passage of legislation that would enable eities and
counties to impose a road access charge.
� .
RE(3IONAL AIRPORT POLICY
position Statemeat
BAc�caRovrm:
The Twin Cities Metropolitan reqion has actively debated noise and
adequacy issues for almost twenty-five years. At t�he direction of
the leqislature, the Metropolitan Council undertook a study of the
MinnQapolis-St. Paul International Airport to consi.der its adQguacy
to meet traffic demand in the future and the environmental capacity
(e.g. , noise) of the community to coexist with the airport.
Followi�g eiqhteen months of study, the Council's Airport Adequacy
Task Force recoinmended that the Metropolitan Council and
Metropolitan Airports Commission implement a "dual t=ack approach"
that includes enhancement of capaeity at the current site �na �ana
banking in anticipation of a replacement airport, should future air
traffic demands warrant it. In 1989, the dual-track approach
recommended by the Adequacy study was incorporated into legislation
which established timelines for various tasks. -
Enhancement of eapacity at the current airport site includes the
extension of existing Runway 4/22 and a reorientation of its
departure routes to the south and southeast, over Burnsville,
Eagan and other parts of Dakota Caunty. The Airport Adequacy Task
Force also concluded that there is a reasonable risk that the
current airport's capacity will be exceeded within five years.
They therefore recommend the possible construction of a new north-
south runway, immediately adjacent to Cedar Avenue, to meet demand
for ten to twenty years, while land banking and environmental
reviews are eonducted for a potential relocation. As this time
period exp3res, a d�ci�ion would be made to �ither construct an
additional runway �t the �xisting site, (a third paralle], runway) .
or to implement a relocation. The addition of a new north-south
runway, immediately ad�acent to Cedar Avenue, would probably
introduce additional fliqhts over Burnsville, Eagan and other parts
of Dakota County. The addition of a third parallel runway would
probably bring additional flights over Mendota Heights, Eagan,
Mendota, Lilydale and other parts of Dakota County. Noise impacts
are difficult to predict because the quieter, "Stage ITI"
generation aircraft are expected to be integrated in airline fleets
during this same time period.
The idea of landbanking in anticipation of a replacement airport
has already spurred proposals from South Minneapolis noise
activists for the use of the University of Minnesota's Rosemount
site. However, the Metropolitan Council asserts that public
ownership of 17,000 acres and strict land use controls over an even
broader area wil.l be required to prevent a chronic noise problem.
Based on those requirements, the Rosemount site is too small and
residential development is too close and is rapidly expanding. If
relocation occurs, it will present the classic public golicy
dilemma - what to do with a very good thing which has some very bad
side effects? Economic benefits to Dakota County from proximity
to an airport could be iost, shifted or gained in a reloc.,a���fE,�
K
OGj 2 31989
���
i . � •
depending on the location of a new site. Moreover, the uncertainty
of relocation could cause developer reluctance to invest in either
existing or potential Dakota County locations. The same
uncertainty will also pertain to the level, duration or possible
introduction oE noise impacts in Dakota County, and its
relationship to residential development or redevelopment.
RBCOMMBNDAT ONB:
The "dual track approach" of the Airport Adequacy Task Force is a
' reasonable means to allow a smooth transition from the eurrent
site, (and its capacity) , to a higher capacity at the current or
a new site. it alro keeps reqional options open in the event triat
capacity projections prove inaccurate, but it could also i.ntroduce
uncertainties in Dakota County that may dislocate commercial and
residential development. In the final analysis, the County's best
interests may be served by a policy of support for the use and
expansion of the current site and, if relocation is necessary,
support for a site of sufficient size to avert environmental issues
of noise while also minimizing adverse economic impacts on Dakota
County. Support for a new site should also be contingent on two
other conditions:
a) Under current criteria, the University of Minnesota's
Rosemount facility should not be considered for a new
airport. It is inadequately sized and too proximate to
rapidly growing residential populations.
b) Enhanaement af the capacity at the existing airport must
be aceompanied by an equally zealous commitment to the
mitigation of possible aircraft noise consequences.
Dakota County should not be the metropolitan dumping
ground for airport noise. Any new or changed
distribution of aircraft noise in Dakota County should
' reflect and be firmiy guided by existing community
comprehensive plans and settiement patterns.
• ' � �
BAZARDOUB MATERIAI,B RESPONSE
position Statement
BACRtiAOIIND
In 1986 Congress passed the Emergency Planninq and Community
Right to Know Act as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (SAR,A) . Gongress enacted this law to help
local communities protect public health and plan for chemical
emergencies. To implement Title III, Conqress required each
state to appoint a State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) ,
and this Commission then established Local Emergency Planning
Committees (LEPC) . _
Although these Local Planning Committees exist, there is no
statewide eoordination for hazardous materials resgonse. At a
lacal leve2, the development of hazardous materials response
capabilities is usually dependent on city size and the perceived
threat of hazardous materials incidents. It is often too
expensive to adequately provide hazardous materials response at
the local level. New federal law requires all personnel
responding to hazardous materials emergencies to be properly
trained and equipped. These standards require the vast majority
of fire departments to provide additional extensive training or
be in violation of the law. It is impossible at the city or
county level to meet these training requirements within a
reasonable cost.
One alternative is to pool resources so every jurisdiction does
not have to develop and maintain sgecialized hazardous response
teams. Regionally orqanized response teams are the most
effective and economical approach for responding to hazardous
materials emerqencfes. The Minnesota Emergency Response
Commission is recommending that a number of advance or level III
regional teams be established throughout the state to provide a
reasonable response time (1 hour or lessj to pot�ntial sites of
hazardous materials emergencies. The team may include members
from various departments within the reqion or members could be
exclusively from one department (e.g. , St. Paul) .
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Authorize the establishment of regional hazardous material
response teams to pravide response to all communities within
a district.
2. Designate a central state organization to establish, direct
and coordinate a hazardous materials response system.
- Under the direction of the Department of Public Safety
- This organization would provide consistent standards and
operating procedures, and would insure proper response
throughout the state.
3. The State should support funding to eover the training,
equipment, and operational costs necessary to develop
regional hazardous material teams which meet Federal and
State safety and training regulations.
� � .
LAND USE PLAWNIN6 LE6ISLATION
Position Statement
BACKGROUND:
SF1510/HF1654 was developed to unify, clarify, and recodify the
existing planning laws for all local units of government. Previous
drafts af these bills, discussed during the past two years, excited much
municipal concern because of poorly drafted sect�ions (largely instigated
by one person). These drafts would have largely reduced the options
. available to cities, and reduced the powers of elected officials to deal
with problems for which they are held responsible.
The present draft under discussion has retained the principal
benefit (organizinq and unifying the law�, while also removing and
correcting the most obnoxious features of the early drafts.
FEATURES:
The present standards required for variances are to be replaced by
a standard of "unnecessary difficulty", which is defined in the statute.
Al1 cities are required to have a Board of Adjustment to handle
variances, but this duty can be assigned to the Planning Commission, to a
� separate body, or to the Council itself. If it is not handled directly
by the Council, the decisions of the Board of Adjustment can be advisory
(to the Council), or final subject to appeal , or final , as the city may
decide.
Cities will be obliged to reach a decision on Conditional Use
Permit applications within 180 days. Parties aggrieved by C.U.P.
decisions have 30 days to appeal .
Cities will have three years to bring their own ordinances into
compliance with the statute, after it becomes effective.
The statute itself is 39 pages long; and makes many procedural
changes; those listed above are illustrative only.
RtCOMMENDATION:
l . Support the passage of legislation to codify and unify state
planning/zoning law, provided that municipalities retain appropriate
options for their own unique circumstances.
2. Support the concept that elected City Council members should
have the final decision on planning and zaning issues, if they wish.
3. Support the proposal ta give cities three years to update their
laws to meet the proposed standards.
4. Oppose any proposed changes to the current bill that might
serve to place additional restrictions on cities, or limit the powers
historically assigned to elected public officials.
J 1 .� � � � � . .
COMPREHENSIVE SOLID WAST$ LEf3ISLATION
Position statement
BACRt3ROIIND
In January 1989 the Metropolitan Council approved Dakota County's
Recycling Implementation Strategy which included a segment on
communi.ty recycling programs and strategies. The following April
all pakota County municipalities began residential curbside
recycling using recyeling bins and in May the Dakota County
, Recyclables Gollection Center began accepting recyclable
materials from County haulers. Throughout the year there has
been substantial cooperation between the communities, garbage
haulers and County to make the residential recycling prQgram a
success.
The Legislature's Special Session of October 1989 passed
aggressive mandates regarding solid waste, including a 35�
recycling goal for metropolitan counties by December 31, 1993
along with problem materials and hazardous waste legislation. By
October 1990 the County must submit a solid waste management plan
to meet the higher goals and include a household hazardous waste
management plan. It is expected that solid waste management
issues will continue to be one of the major environmental issues
both locally and nationally.
RECOMMENDATiQNS
1. There should be no major statutory changes for the
metropolitan solid waste management system.
- The recently passed SCORE legislation substantially
expanded the roles o� cities and counties i.n solid
waste management. The elements of this sys�tem should
be allowed to mature and incrementally evolve. The
Metropolitan Council should continue to be the policy
coordinator for this metropalitan solid wa�te abatement
system, with implementation the responsibil.ity of
counties and cities.
- We oppose any legislation which would depax�t from the
current practice of relyinq an judicial int.erpretations
of the federal and state constitutions' tak:ing clauses.
2. The purposes and priorities for solid waste poli.eies in the
State of Minnesota may vary by region or even by� community.
These differences need to be recognized when legislation
seeks to specify goals, disposal strategies, ar program
methods. Similarly, it must be recognized that solid waste
disposal policies are important, but not paramou,nt, matters
. � �
COMPREHENSIVB SOLID WASTE L8f33I8LATION
Position statement
Page 2
of state concern. They must be developed and implemented
with awareness and accommodation of the many other important
social purposes that confront state, county and local
governments.
3. The policy, regulatory, and administrative framework for
solid waste disposal in Minnesota should promote
flexibility, local innovation, and active partnership with
the private sector.
- Program standards and/or performance goals (not
compliance with specified/mandated methods) should
continue to serve as the basis for evaluating program •
successes. For example, SCORE recognizes mechanical
separation as an acceptable method for landfill
abatement.
- Solid waste program design and implementation decisions
should be made the locai and county levels of
government. They can more effectively reflect the
individual characteristics and preferences of their
communities, Centralized administration and regulation
should be a measure of last resort.
- Solid waste programs should utilize and incorpo�ate
existing and developing private sector systems. Solid
waste program design and impiementation decisions
should seek to minimize governmental entanglement in
the marketplaee.
4. Current funding mechanisms and levels for recycling and
abatement efforts should be maintained or expanded.
- There should be no new mandates in this policy area
without an. accompanying source of funding.
- The State and/or counties should continue to provide
the major financial support for local abatement and
recyeling programs. To that end, the county waste
surcharge authorization should be continued.
a , • ,
MA88 TRANSIT ,
Position etatement
BACK¢ROUND
Based upon recent I.egislative directives to the Department of
Transportation, Metropolitan Council, Regio�al Transit Hoard and
REgional Rail Authorities, a new era of transpartati.on/transit
planning and eoordination has been initiated. The Metropolitan
Council's ��1989 Transportation Develop�ent Quide/policy Plan�� and
the RTB's ��1990-1994 Five-Year Plan�� establish the framework for
maximum eoordination for the design and implementation of an
integrated transit system in the Twin Cities Metropolitan Area.
RECOMMENDATIQN
The Legislature should continued to stress the merits of an
integrated transit system and establish transit funding as a top
priority in the 1990s.