Agenda - Charter Commission - 04/23/2014

Home

Commissioner Bendtsen stated that perhaps the special assessment level should also be set at 20 percent. Chairperson Field noted that currently the assessment level is set at up to 50 percent and did not believe that the Charter Commission should move forward with removing the option to utilize franchise fees as well as lower the ability to assess. City Administrator Ulrich explained the process for assessment and noted that a project could not be assessed for more than the value of benefit to the property. He also explained the process for bonding and noted that prior to a special assessment the applicable residents are notified for a public hearing. Commissioner Niska referenced the proposed amendment from staff, specifically in regard to limiting special assessments and the effect that would have. City Attorney Langel noted that the intent of that amendment would be to ensure that residents cannot be billed twice, through assessment and franchise fees. He explained that if the franchise fee fund was used for road improvements, that would mean that the assessment could not occur and the bonding could not be obtained. He stated that the intent is to gather the franchise fees for this use and this use only during the five -year period and noted that the assessments could not occur during that time. He noted that the utility company actually places a limit of five percent of the utility company's gross revenues on the franchise fee in order to limit that tool. Commissioner Sivertson stated that if the Commission were to compromise on the draft proposed by the Council, perhaps the time period should be limited to one year, after which time the Council would be forced to budget for that aspect. Commissioner Deemer noted that there are four franchises in the City and wanted to ensure that the document would ensure that the fourth franchise is not created for cable television. Commissioner Niska noted that the State Statute would limit this franchise use to electric and gas and would not apply to cable television. Commissioner Anderson questioned if a franchise fee must be one pool of money or whether the specific purpose could be identified. City Attorney Langel noted that the State Statute does not limit how the City pools the money and explained that the City Council proposed this language, for the funds to be used only for this purpose, in order to incorporate the input from the Charter Commission. Commissioner Bendtsen noted that this franchise fee would be applied equally to all properties and would not be applied based on property values. He stated that this is a tax and believed, as proposed, that this is unfair as it should be tied to the value of the property. Charter Commission/ January 27, 2014 Page 5 of 10