Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br />I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> <br /> DEVELOPMENT FEES <br />By: William K. ~oodrich, City Attorney <br />and Ryan Schroeder, City Admin£strator <br /> <br />FC CASE <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />In March 1996, pursuant to Resolution 96-03-052 the City commenced <br />to collect a surcharge on the issuance of building permits as a <br />transportation impact fee. Also in March 1996 pursuant to <br />Ordinance 96-04 the City began collecting a development assessment <br />fee on all new subdivisions as a transportation impact fee. <br /> <br />In March 1997 the Minnesota Supreme Court in the case of Country_ <br />~oe, JnQ. vs. ~it¥ of Eaten ruled the5 statutory cities do not have <br />the authority to charge the impact fees similar to those imposed by <br />Resolution 96-03-052 and Ordinance 96-04. While Ramsey is a <br />charter City and not a statutor~ City, it seems likely the Court <br />would conclude that charter cities, similarly to statutory cities, <br />do not have the authority to impose the impact fees,. <br /> <br />Therefore, in light of the above, it is the City Attorney's opinion <br />that the City repeal the above referenced Resolution and Ordinance. <br /> <br />The Council will need to discuss and make a decision relative to <br />the impact fees previously collected. It is our recommendation <br />that the building permit fees collected be returned to those <br />parties who remitted the same for those homes which are not within <br />a subdivision approved since March 1, 1996. It is further our <br />recommendation that the Development impact fees which are <br />referenced within each subdivision's Development: Agreement be <br />reviewed on a case by case basis and negotiated with. the respective <br />developers. It is staff's expectation that the affected developers <br />will agree that the fees collected can be redesignated within the <br />development agreement for specific improvements installed which <br />benefit the subdivision. <br /> <br />Enclosure~: <br /> <br />l) <br /> <br />November 14, 1995, August 5, 1996, and March 5, 1997 City <br />Attorney Memorandums on this subject; <br /> <br />Proposed Ordinance repealing Ordinance 96-04; <br /> <br />Council Action:~/.~~~_~ <br />Motion to .a~g~'a.n~ Ordinance repealing Ordinance 96-04 which <br />Ordinance 96-04 is entitled "An Ordinance Establishing a <br />Development Assessment Fee on all New Subdivisions" <br /> <br />and <br /> <br /> <br />