Agenda - Council Work Session - 01/14/2014

Home

434997v1 LW105 -1 D. Alternatives. If a city in a joint powers WMO is concerned about loss of control or about being required to make contributions, or too large a contribution, for a project imposed on it by other members, these concerns could be addressed in a number of other ways. These include: 1) Changing the formula for calculating each party's percentage. 2) Expanding the dialogue between and among parties before a final decision is made. This could include a longer period of notice to cities, more public hearings, joint meetings of city councils, or other such means. 3) Impose a cap or limit on the amount of CIP project costs that the WMO can order in a given year. 4) Include in the JPA a policy statement that identifies specific concerns about fairness and establishes criteria that will be considered by the WMO before imposing an obligation to pay for capital costs or provide for periodic review of the benefits to each city compared to the costs incurred. For example, the JPA for the Mississippi WMO states: "Projects will be funded in the watershed district on the basis of potential merit to all the Members and according to the criteria established in the MWMO Watershed Management Plan. Annually a review shall take place showing how much each Member has contributed to the watershed levy and how much each Member has benefited from projects undertaken in their jurisdiction ...." 5) Impose a cap on the amount to be spent on a capital project and require that exceeding that cap is permitted only upon approval of exceeding the cap by resolution of two- thirds of the city councils of the member cities. This would create another forum that a city opposing a project could use to attempt to have the project defeated. 6) If specific kinds of capital projects are matters of concern, impose or specify different contributions, or contribution limits, for that kind of project. 5. MISCELLANEOUS In addition to the comments above, I would recommend that the Commission consider the following: a) If the amendment agreed upon by the cities is as substantial as that suggested by Ramsey, I would recommend that it take the form of a new, single joint powers agreement document that incorporates the changes rather than a second amendment, which will require a reader to go back and forth between several documents to determine the terms of the agreement. b) Although Ramsey does not propose to extend the term of the JPA, I would recommend that such an extension be included with any other changes since it is now just over one year until the JPA expires. Page 5