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...