Minutes - Council - 10/24/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Perry stated that if the choice is between the current policy and the proposed 10-year deferment one, they would take the 10 years - this may be a compromise. If the Charter Commission comes up with a bigger percentage that have to be in favor of a project, you are lessening the people would could defer out of the system. You could visit that after the Charter reviews this. Finance Officer Hart stated that "as it pertains to the City losing dollars - it's not the City - it's the residents that would be hooking up. They would be footing the bill. It's the residents who use the system." Case 07: Metropolitan Livable Communities Act City Administrator Schroeder stated that during the 1995 session, the State legislature passed a new initiative known as the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. This law requires that each community within Metropolitan Council jurisdiction be allocated affordable and life-cycle housing goals. The Metropolitan Council is asking each City to set a housing goal. The housing goals address percentage of affordable owner and rental units relative to the other housing stock. They also speak to development density and percentage of single family versus multifamily housing. He presented the figures and stated they speak to the increases in housing per acre. He summarized from their figures, that it appears the goals for affordable housing in Anoka County is higher, for example, than Eden Prairie. Many Northern Metro officials have seen this as unfair and exacerbating an already inappropriate affordability pattern. He stated he is asking Council to consider approval of the resolution from the Met Council; however, this raises serious issues. The City does have the opportunity to discuss the housing goals each year. Also, there is a penalty for not participating in the program. That penalty currently is simply that we cannot participate in any Metro Council or Department of Economic Development grant programs unless we are a program participant. Adoption of the resolution allows for further negotiations. If Council determines in the future that program disadvantages outweigh advantages, you have the choice of not accomplishing one of the target steps or future steps. He added that if Council does not adopt this resolution - we may end up known as a community that is not interested in working with the Metro Area in providing housing styles for all incomes. Also, this legislation provides several funding pots, etc. The State has had various funding pots throughout time. These may be different - it makes sense for Ramsey not to be relegated to the position of not even being a contender. While this appears negative, the first step alone does not subject the City to any particular position as far as housing goes. We have the opportunity to have a number of discussions prior to these occurring. Councilmember Peterson inquired if on June 30, we decide this is not the direction we want to go, can we get out at that time? Mr. Schroeder replied yes - this is an annual election. He disseminated a letter from Craig Rapp who was the City Manager for Brooklyn Park. He expressed trust in Mr. Rapp's statements about wanting to work with the cities. Councilmember Zimmerman commented about working toward low income housing. We have been fighting to get a better park system - to add more people would do our citizens a disservice - no jobs, no shopping malls and poor transportation. Hopefully, we can develop some flexibility. This does not give Ramsey much. Mayor Hardin agreed that some of the target numbers are unrealistic, but felt it behooves the City to show initiative. City Council/October 24, 1995 Page 13 of 19