Laserfiche WebLink
RELEVANT LINKS: <br />Minn. Stat. § 429.031, subd. <br />1(t). <br />Minn. Stat. § 429.031, subd. <br />1(f). <br />Nastrum v. City of Blaine, <br />515 N.W.2d 374, (Minn. <br />1994). <br />See Form 7A (Alternative <br />Resolution Ordering <br />Improvement and preparation <br />of Plans). <br />See Form 7 (Resolution <br />Ordering Improvement and <br />Preparation of Plans). <br />Minn. Stat. § 462.356. <br />Minn. Stat. § 429.031, subd. <br />1(0. <br />Minn. Stat. § 429.041, subd. <br />1. <br />Minn. Stat. § 435.191. <br />See Section I-C: Practical <br />points to consider. <br />See Form 10. <br />See LMC information memo <br />Competitive Bidding <br />Requirements in Cities. <br />See Form 9. <br />F. Ordering the improvement <br />A resolution ordering the improvement may be adopted at any time within <br />six months after the date of the improvement hearing. This resolution may <br />reduce, but not increase, the extent of the improvement as stated in the <br />notice of hearing. As a practical matter, if the cost of improvement and thus <br />the amount to be assessed changes by at least 25%, council might wish to <br />hold the improvement hearing again. <br />1. Vote requirements for ordering the improvement <br />If the improvement is made pursuant to a legally sufficient petition from <br />property owners, the council adopts the resolution by a simple majority vote <br />of all members of the council. If there is not a petition, adoption requires a <br />"super -majority" vote, meaning the council can only adopt the resolution by <br />a four -fifths vote of all members of the council. (If the mayor of a charter <br />city has no vote or votes only in case of a tie, the mayor is not considered a <br />member for the purpose of determining a four -fifths majority vote). <br />There is another voting quirk tangentially related to ordering the <br />improvement; as noted above, if a city with a comprehensive plan <br />determines that the improvement has no relationship to the plan, it need not <br />send the proposed capital improvement to the planning agency for review; <br />however, the council must adopt such a resolution by a two thirds vote. <br />2. Time limits for local improvements <br />The resolution ordering the improvement may be adopted at any time within <br />six months after the date of the improvement hearing. <br />Either arrangements for day labor or a contract must be made within one <br />year of adopting the resolution ordering the improvement -- unless the <br />council specifically states a different timeframe in the resolution ordering <br />the improvement. <br />G. Competitive bidding <br />The law permits the council to carry out, in advance of the assessment <br />hearing, virtually all the necessary steps prior to actually issuing a contract <br />for the improvement. Thus, if the council wishes to provide firm estimates of <br />costs at the improvement (first) hearing, it may, in addition to the required <br />preliminary report, prepare completed plans and specifications, advertise for <br />bids, and open and tabulate them before the assessment (second) hearing. <br />Once a city council orders a public improvement, staff or consultants <br />prepare the necessary plans and specifications and the council either: <br />League of Minnesota Cities Information Memo: 9/22/2011 <br />Special Assessment Guide Page 17 <br />