Laserfiche WebLink
electronic rosters, this report, as well as data <br />directly from jurisdictions that have used the <br />technology, may be helpful in determining <br />next steps. <br />Response: As the Legislature continues to <br />examine the use of electronic rosters, <br />cities should retain the option of utilizing <br />this technology but should not be <br />required to do so. <br />SD-71. Precinct Boundaries <br />Issue: Currently when cities set precinct <br />boundaries, they must follow streets or <br />physically recognizable features. This <br />creates problems when cities have more than <br />one school district and the school district <br />boundary does not adhere to those same <br />requirements. For example, a school district <br />may have a boundary that is an alley and the <br />city cannot adjust their precinct to match <br />because a city's boundary must be a street or <br />a physically recognizable feature. This can <br />result in a precinct having two ballots for <br />different school districts within the same <br />city precinct causing confusion for voters <br />and election judges, and creating <br />inefficiencies in administering elections. <br />According to Minn. R, 8255.0020, a city <br />may follow a school district boundary that <br />does not have a recognizable physical <br />feature but must then name the precinct in a <br />manner that reflects the relationship for the <br />purpose of reporting election results. This <br />leads to precinct names such as "Precinct <br />1 South and Precinct 1North" to reflect the <br />different school districts represented. This is <br />also confusing for voters who many not <br />know in which school district they live. <br />Response: The League of Minnesota <br />Cities encourages the Legislature to <br />create uniform rules in statute for <br />determining precinct boundaries. To <br />simplify the process for voters and <br />elections administrators, cities should <br />have the authority to set precinct <br />boundaries on existing streets, a <br />physically recognizable feature or another <br />political boundary such as a school <br />district boundary. The League also <br />supports eliminating the naming <br />requirement and allowing for the creation <br />of new precincts that have one ballot for <br />both the school district and city. <br />SD-72. Park and Library Land Tax <br />Break <br />Issue: As the price for land increases, it is <br />becoming more difficult for cities and other <br />local units of government to compete with <br />developers to save and secure land and <br />easements that are deemed appropriate for <br />park, library, trail, and green spaces. <br />Response: The state should amend the tax <br />laws to provide tax incentives for <br />property owners who sell land and <br />easements to local units of government <br />when the land is to be used for park, <br />library, trail or green space purposes. <br />SD-73. Charter Law Expense Limit <br />Increase <br />Issue: Under current law (Minn. Stat. § <br />410.06), charter commission expenses that <br />are paid by the city are limited to $10,000 in <br />a first class city and $1,500 in all other <br />cities. The first class city limit was increased <br />in 1961 from $1,500 to $10,000 while the <br />limits for all other charter cities have not <br />been adjusted since 1947. <br />Response: The League of Minnesota <br />Cities supports increasing the allowable <br />annual charter commission expense limit <br />to $5,000 for cities other than cities of the <br />first class. <br />League of Minnesota Cities <br />2015 City Policies Page 44 <br />