Agenda - Charter Commission - 01/27/2014

Home

Councilmember LeTourneau stated he would want to ensure that the Council is within its constitutional rights to exercise powers. He asked whether any of the franchise fee cons would be in conflict with the constitutionality of the Charter. Commissioner Deemer stated they are unconstitutional based on current statutory language for what projects franchise fee revenues can be used to fund. Commissioner Niska stated the Commission is not a court of law, and it is not the role of the Commission to rule on what is or is not allowed by statute. He added the Commission is concerned with whether additional structural restrictions can be placed on City government. He noted voters could decide whether a structural limitation should be placed on the City. Mayor Strommen stated this is an issue of governance rather than constitutionality. Commissioner Sivertson stated, with regard to a general property tax levy, it is a dedicated source of funding that is nondiscretionary. He asked whether it is within the Charter Commission' s power to dedicate via Charter a portion of general property tax levy for road maintenance. Chairperson Field stated that Ham Lake is doing that, and might be considered as an option. Commissioner Deemer stated that there is inequality of method when a resident with multiple meters is calculated the same way as a resident with 2 meters. Finance Director Lund stated the utility companies have said that the City can manually adjust the calculation so that there is only one charge per address. City Administrator Ulrich suggested that the group focus on the top three funding solutions: franchise fees, general fund and assessments. He reviewed the possible solution of the use of general property tax levy with a portion dedicated to street maintenance by Charter. Commissioner Bendtsen stated, with regard to assessments, a con would be that the current assessments are too high, and they can be counter - petitioned. He added the Charter should raise the percentage required to block a project and lower assessments. Commissioner Deemer stated, with regard to the special election process, a City -wide Franchise Fee Ordinance would be impossible unless the Charter is changed. He asked whether a City- wide assessment could be dedicated to street repairs. City Attorney Langel stated that is not possible, as an assessment requires that the benefit to the City equals the amount of the assessment. He added the City must prove that there is a benefit to do an assessment. Councilmember Backous stated that is a con, because the benefit is difficult to quantify and prove. City Council Work Session / November 19, 2013 Page 7 of 15