Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.e. Legislative Package . �� P.O f3nX 51� �-1�tf O �a7�-�a5T►� ST w � E�:���;r��nn�lurv�r_MwN��st�rn r„osn C�.SQ'1'Yt-f.�tit 3?� r,,�> �:�, ���� ! ITEM #� � Januarp 12, 1990 ' T0: t4AY0R NA�P�R COUNCILi�IEMBERS: KLASSEN OXBOROUGH WILLCOX � WIPFERMANN <'. � � FROMt STEPHAN JILK, ADMINIS'PRATOR �"f� ; i RE: LEGISLAT:CVE POSITIUN STATFMENTS The Dakota C�unty Administrators met an Thursday, January llth to discuss the le�islative position statements that you reviewed and commented on at our last city cauncil meeting. Each eity pravided input and feedback from their 'individuai citq couneils and staff. Several minor revis�.ons were discus4ed and agreed upon. The final draft of the documents wi11 be out for use in the next week. The c3ties w�ll thexi present the posit3ons to the legislators at the prvposed break.f.ast meeting on February 2nd, at the Aurnaville Holiday Tnn at 7 : 3� A,M. . An elected o£f.icial from the r_ities and Dakota County will make the presentations. We hope we ean get at least ane elected o�fici.al from each city and Dekota County to attend along w�.th city and County Administrators. Please consider attending if possible. The fallowing chang�s were made and agreed upon: Regional Airt�ort Policy - Second page - item b) �liminate the sentence "Dakota County stiauld not b� the metropolitan dumping ground for airport noise." Mass Transit -- In the are��ammendation change the words "trans�.t" to "transpvrCation" . Comprehensive So11d Waste - agreed that the position paper should �iot be revised but that a verbal statement , by the Presenter, shou�:d he made regarding the ne�d for the legistature to considsr the issue regarding pl�s�ica reeqcling . Legislative Posit3_on Changes Page 2 Comparable Wor�h - Thex�e was to be no positi.�n on comparable warth presented because it seemed as thou�h the legislature was going to leave the comparable worth issue at rest . But, Nina Rothsch:ild, �he comrnissioner of Human Services for the State of Minnesota, has drafted legislation to be introduced which c.ould cause ma,�or changes in the comparable worth law which the cities must p�vtest . The proposed legislation would cause total control of wage and benefits to public a;�ployees in the state to come under tlie Department of Human Services and secandly i.t would c�►use �:11 r_:ities , counties and schaol distriets �in the state to redo their coinparable worth using such cr3.�Pri.a �s to cau�c� ma�or increases in ernplayee c4sts. A proposed poeiti.on statement which basically suggests, th�t the l,egtslature should �ust leave the Comparable Saorth law al��ne and let public emplo�ers complete the implementation of the current 1aw is attached and we recommend that :i.t beeome part of the legi�lative package Eor our cities. Your consideration of the revised positions and your approval of the entire package is requested. attachments i�� PROPOSED ADDITION COMPARABI.E i�tORTH Position Statement BACKGR�UND: The Minnesota Pay Equity Law, passed by the 1984 Legislature, has mandated that all public employers conduct a compa�able worth stuay and report the results to the State. Subsequent legislation has also mandated implementation of the study results by December 31, 1991 and prescribed certain penal�ies for failure to comply. Most cities throughout the State, and in Dakota County, h�ave demonstrated their support for the concept and objectives of the law by completing studies and beginning impl.ementation. Many have opted for a three year_ implementation program. Alleged pay ! inequities can be resolved through the State Department of Human '''� Rights. the court system, or aarbitration. ' Cities and the legislature need time to consider and analyze the xesults of the goad faith efforts that have been eompleted. �hanges at this time could lead to unnecessary expense and delays in implementation. RECOMMENDATIONS: l . There should be no statutory changes in comparable worth guidelines and penaities until the current pragrams haue had the opportunity ta prove themselves. Emphasis should be placed on enforcing existing penalties and guidelines. 2 . The State legislature should provide levy limit adjustments for pay equity implementation. 3. The legislature should not endanager the economic and efficient provision of public services by prohibiting contracting aut or joint powers agreements far various serviees, nor use public agencies as the vehicle to implement pay equity in the private sector through contract compliance requirements. .� �'�;�� ,�,`! � - 1 - NOV 15 '89 i l�45 DAKU TH c:M 1 Y rHYSt� �vt��r�•�r i � •�• � • DAKDTA CQUN'f Y i�IANAG�RS ` Pas�tion State�ent COt�CCY STATE AID QISTRIBUTIQN fORF1ULA BACK6ROUPtD The constitutfanal amen�nent tfiat governs the distribution of the Nighw�y �sers Fund was adopted in 1958 and provided for 62x oT the monies in the fund to be distributed to state ro�ds, 29% to be distr36uted to coun�y roads and 9% to tity roads. The distribution of these funds amonq �he county and city road systems is governed by both statute �nd �dministr�tive rule. For a variety of reasons the distribution of the City funds has continued to meet the +Chanqing needs af c9ties mnd the pvpul�tion growth �nd has resulted in a formul� that distributes approximately 80X of the city state aid hiqhway funds to cities Sn the seven county metropoli�an area. Changes in the distributtan for the Caunty State Aid Highway (CSaM) iund s, how�ver, h�ve not foilvwed the population growth, and as a result, we find tfiat tod�y only about 17.7� ot the CSAN iunds are distributed to counties in the seven county metrvpolitan area. Because virtually a11 of Dakota County's use of G5AH funds are� expended withjn the variaus cities fn Qakata County and the resulting improvements to the county road system is a direct benefit to the cities in Dakota CouRty, it would be beneficial to both Dak4ta Cau�ty and cities of Dakota Caunty to bring about a more equitabte distrlbution of CSAH funds. The current statutory distribution formula is as follows: 10� equally to the 87 counties lOx based on the nurnber of vehicles reqistered 30x the number of miles of CSAFi ro�ds 5d� on need as determined by the Screening Committee The Screening Comnittee is made up of one represent�tive from each of the 9 State Nighway Distr#cts qf which ther'e are 2 in the seven COunty �12tro are�. The definition of need is mai�ly spelled out in administrative rule, but , proposed revlsions are discussed and voted on by the manbers of ths Screenfng Conmittee which is dominateci by the rural part of Minnesota. RECOMMENDATION - Modify the current statutary distribution formula as follows: 10� equally to the 8) counties 309G based an the number of veMicles reg#stered 30� tfie number of miles of CSAH raads 30� on need as determined by the Screening Carm'tttee - Assign gr2ater priority to the number of veh�tcles registered, and redute the importance of the needs factor. - �xpand membersh7p of the Screening Comnittee to 14 members by adding a m�nber fram each of tfie urban counttes (over 175,000 populatian} . - Base funding on lane miles rather than center tine miles. LEGIS-HYtY ROAD IMPACT FEES Position Statement BACKGROUND: Local governments are using a variety of techniques to privately . f inance public infrastructure. One such technique is imgact fees. An impact fee can be def ined as, "single payment(s) required to be made by builders or� developers at the time of development approvai and calcnlated to be the proportionate share of the capital cost of providing major facilties (arterial roads, interceptor 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 legislation in the Minnesota Legislature that wou].d enab].e eities and counties to impose a road access charge (a form of an impact fee) to all new developments. Proposals have been made in the past that would allow cities to assess a fee up to $?50 per single family home against all new developments based upon the number af vehicle trips that the project generated. This legislation was introduced in the 198? and the 1988 legislative sessions. . . Supporters of enabling legislation believe that legislation allowing cities to . collect a road acc�ss charge would provide cities with a much needed additional source of funding to help keep the arterial and callector street systems closer 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 spxeads the cost of part Qf the arteria]./coliector str�st system over a � • larger area of a city since the .new or .expanded land use would pay regardless of whether it was actually located adjacent ta the arterial/collector street. We believe that the cities of Dakota County� facing extreme growth and fiscal stress, need the additional. revenue that would become avai.lable fio it as a result of a raad access fee. RECOMMENDATIONS: 1.. Support the passage of iegislation that wovld enable cities and counties to impose a road access charge. RE(�IONAI, AIRPORT POLICY Pcasition �tatement SACR�1t�OND s The Twin Cities Metropolitan reqion has actively debated noise and adequacy issues for almost twenty-five years. At the direction of the legislature, the Metropolitan Council undertook a study of the Minneapolis-St. Paul Tnternational Airport to consider its adequaey to meet traffic demand in the future and the environmental capacity (e.g. , noise) of the community to coexist with the airport. Following eighteen months of study, the Council's Airport Adequacy Task Force recommended that the Metropolitan Council and Metropoli.tan Airports Commission implement a "dual track approach" that includes enhancement of eapacity at the current site and land bankir�g in anticipation of a replacement airpor�, shauld 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 var3ous tasks. • Enhancement of capacity at the current airport site includes the extension of existing Runway 4/22 and a reorientation af its departure routes to the south and southeast, over Burnsville, Eagan and other parts of Dakota County. The Airport Adequacy Task Force also concluded that there is a reasonable risk that the current airport's capacity will be exeeeded 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 a�d environmental . reviews are conducted for a potentiaZ relocation. As this time geriod expires, a decision would be made to either construct an additional runway at the existing site, (a third parallel runway) , or to implement a relocation. The addition of a new nort�-south runway, immediateZy adjacent to Cedar Avenue, would probably introduce additional flights over Burnsville, Eagan and other parts of Dakota County. The addition of a third paralle� runway would probably bring additional flights over Mendota Heights, Eaqan, Mendota, Lilydale and other garts of Dakota County. Noise impacts are difficult to predict because the quieter, "Stage II�" 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 proposa3s from Sauth Minneapolis noise activists for the use of the University of Minnesota's Rosemount site. However, the Metrapolitan Council asserts that publ,i� ownership of 17,000 acres and strict land use controls over an even broader area will be required to prevent � chronic noise p�oblem. Based on those requirements, �he Rosemount site is tpo �mal�. and residential development is toa close and is rapidly expanding. If relocation occurs, it will present the classia public policy dilemma - what to c�o with a very good thing which has some very bad side effects? Ecc�nomic benefits to Dakota Caunty from proximity to an airport could be lost, shifted or gained in a reloc„����E,� K 4�� � � ��89 r���' depenaing on the location of a new site. Moreover, the uncertainty of relocation could cause develaper reluctance to invest in either existing or potential Dakota County locations, The same uncertainty wi11 also p+�rtain to th� level, duration or possibZe introduction of noise impacts in Dakota County, and its relationship to residential development or redevelopment. R�COMMEND�?IONB: The "dual track approach" of the Airport Adequacy Task Force is a � reasonable means to allow a smooth transition from the current site, (and its capacity) , to a higher capacity at the current or a new site. It also keeps xegional options open in the event that capacity pro�ections prove inacaurate, but it could also introduce 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 eurrent sa�te and, if relacation is neeessary, 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 ather aonditian�: a) Under current ariteria, the University of Minnesota's Rosemount facility should not be considered for a new airport. It is inadequately sized and toa proximate to rapidly growing residential populations. b) Enhancement of the capacity at the existing airpart must be accompanied by an equally zealous commitment to the mitigatfon af possible aircraft noise consequences. Dakota county $hould not be the metropQlitan dumping ground for airport noise. Any new or changed distributian of aircraft noise in Dakota C�unty should ' re€lect and be firmly guided by existing community comprehensive plans and settlement patterns. HAZARDOIIS MATERIALS RESPONSE Po9ition 8tatement BACRaROOND In 1986 Congress passed the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act as Title III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA} . Congress enaeted this Iaw to help local communities protect public health and plan for chemical emergencies. To implement Tit1e III, Congress required each state to appoint a State Emergency Response Commissian (SERC) , and this Commission then established Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPC) . Although these Local Flanning Committees exist, there is no atatewide coordination for hazardous materi.s�.a respons�e. At a 1oca1 level, the development of hazardous materials response capabiiities is usua�ly dependent on city size and the gerceived threat of hazardous materials incidents. It is often tao expensive to adequately provide hazardous materials respanse at the locai level. New federal law requires all personnel responding ta hazardous materials emergeneies 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 eity or county level to meet thes� training requirements within a reasonable cost. One alternative is to pool resources so every jurisdiction does not have to develop and maintain specialized hazardous response teams. Regionally organized response teams are the most effective and economical approach for responding to hazardous materials emergencies. The Minnesota Emergency Resgonse Commission is recammending 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 potential sitss of hazardous material.s emergencies. The team may include members from various departments within the region or memhers cou�d be exclusively from one department (e.g. , St. Paulj . RBCOMMENDATIONB 1. Authorize the establishment of regianal hazardous material response teams to provide 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 pracedures, and would insure groper response throughout the state. 3. The State sh�uld support funding to cover the training, equipment, and operational costs necessary to deveiop regional hazardous material teams which meet Federal and State safety and training regulations. LAND USE PLANNIN6 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 of these bills, discussed during the past two years, exeited much municipal concern beeause of poorly drafted sections (largely instigated by one personj. 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 (organizing 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. All cit3es are required ta have a Board of Adjustment to hand1e variances, but this duty can be assigned to the Planning Commission, ta a separate body, or ta the Gouncil itself, If it is nat handled directty by the Coancil, the decisions of the Baard 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 llse Permit applications within 180 days. Parties aggrieved by C.U.P. decisions have 3U days to appeal . Cities will have three years to bring their own ordinances into compliance with tfie statute, after it becomes effective. The statute itself is 39 pages long; and makes many procedural changes; those listed above are illustrative only. RtCOMMENDATION: 1 . Support the passage of legislation to codify and unify state planning/zoning law, provided that municipalities retain appropriate options �or their own unique circumstances. 2. Support the concept that elected City Council members should have the final decision on planning and zoning issues, if they wish. 3. Support the proposal to 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. COMPREHENSIVB 80LID WASTB LEGISLATION Posi.tion 8tatement sACRaRovNn In January 1989 the Metropolitan Council approved Dakota County�s Reeyclinq Implemen�ation Strategy which included a segment on community recyclinq programs and strategies. The following April all Dakota County municipalities began residential curbside recycling using recycling bins and in May the Dakota County Recyclables Collection Center began accepting recyclable materials from Caunty haulers. Throughout the year there has been substantial cooperation between the communities, garbage haulers and County to make the residential recycling program a success. The Legislature's Speeial Session of Clctober 1989 passed aggressive mandates regarding solid waste, including a 35� recycling goal for metropolitan counties by December 31, 1993 along with problem materials and hazardaus waste legisiation. By October 1990 the County must submit a solid waste management plan to meet the higher goals and a.nelude a household hazardous waste management plan. It is expected that, solid waste management issues will c4ntinue to be one of the majar enviranmental issues both locally and nationally. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. There should be no major statutory changes for the metropolitan solid waste management system. - The recently passed SCORE legislation substantially expanded the roles of cities and eounties in solid waste management. The elements of this system should be allowed to ma�ure and incrementally evolve. The Metropolitan Council shauld continue to be the policy coordinator for this metropolitan sol.id waste abatement system, with implementation the responsibility of counties and cities. - We oppose any legislation which would depart from the current practice of relying on judicial interpretations of the federal and state constitutions' taking clauses. 2. The purposes and priorities far solid waste policies in the State of Mi,nnesota may vary by region or even by community. These differences need to be recognized when legislation seeks to speeify goals, disposal strateqies, or program m�thods. Similarly, it must be recognized that solid waste disposal policies are important, but not paramount, matters COMPREHENSIV$ SOLID WASTE LEaISLATION 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 £or solid waste disposal in Minnesota should promote flexibiiity, local innovatian, and active partnership with the private sector. - Prograrn 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 meGhanioal separation as an acceptable method fox landfill abatement. - Solid waste program design and implementation deca.sions should be made the icacal and caunty levels of government. They ean more effectively reflect the individual Gharacteristics and preferences of their communities. Centralized administration and regulatian should be a measure of last resort. - Solid waste programs should utilize and incorparate existing and deveioping private sector systems. Solid waste program design and implementation decisions should seek to minimize governmental entanglement in the marketplace. 4. Current funding mechanisms and levels for recyel.ing and abatement efforts should be maintained or expanded. - There should be no new mandates in this policy area Wltl'101it an- accompanying source of funding. - The State and/or coun�ies should continu� to pravide the major financial support for local abatement and recycling programs. To that end, the county waste surcharge authorization should be continued. MA88 TRANBIT Pos�ition statameAt BACRt�ROONT3 Based upon recent legislative di.rectives to the Uepartment of Transportation, Metropolitan Council, Regional Transit Board and REgional Rail Authorities, a new era of transportation/transit � planning and coordination has been initiated. The Metropolitan Council's ��1989 Trnnsportation Develapment GuidejPolicy Plan�• and the RTB's ��1990-1994 Five-Year Plan�� establish the fra�nework for maximum coordi.nation for the design and implementation of an integrated transit system in the Twin Cities Metropalitan Area. RECOMMENDATION The Legislature shauld continued to stress the meri�s of an integrated transit system and establish transit funding as a top priority in the 1990s. d...