Laserfiche WebLink
cities given that state law does not expressly <br />provide authority on other code matters. <br />Response: The League of Minnesota <br />Cities continues to support the use of city <br />administrative fines for local regulatory <br />ordinances, such as building codes, zoning <br />codes, health codes, public nuisance <br />ordinances, and regulatory matters that <br />are not duplicative of misdemeanor or <br />higher -level state traffic and criminal <br />offenses. The Legislature should clarify <br />that both statutory and home rules <br />charter cities have the authority to issue <br />administrative citations for code <br />violations. Further, state statute should <br />allow statutory and home rule charter <br />cities to adjudicate administrative <br />citations and to assess a lien on properties <br />for unpaid administrative fines. <br />SD-17. Contracting and Purchasing <br />Issue: Minnesota statutes stipulate <br />contracting and purchasing requirements for <br />Minnesota cities. The law prescribes the <br />process political subdivisions must use to <br />make purchases and award contracts, and <br />requires a competitive sealed bid procedure <br />for contracts or purchases over $100,000. <br />The intent of these statutory requirements is <br />to provide taxpayers with the best value for <br />their dollar and ensure integrity in the <br />process. However, imposing these statutory <br />requirements may, at times, result in <br />political subdivisions paying more for goods <br />and services than private entities under the <br />same circumstances. <br />The Legislature recognized the benefits <br />associated with alternative purchasing <br />methods when it amended municipal <br />contracting law in 2004 to authorize the use <br />of reverse auctions to purchase supplies, <br />materials, and equipment. Similarly, other <br />contracting procedures, including "design - <br />build" and direct negotiation are proven <br />alternatives to the formal bidding process. <br />Authorizing broader use of these types of <br />alternatives as the Legislature did in 2009 by <br />authorizing a design -build pilot program, <br />would enhance the ability of cities to make <br />appropriate and fiscally responsible <br />purchasing decisions. <br />Response: The League of Minnesota <br />Cities supports broader use of alternative <br />contracting and purchasing methods that <br />streamline the process and reduce local <br />purchasing costs. Specifically, the League <br />supports authorizing cities to use the <br />design -build procedure and providing <br />municipalities with broader authority, <br />similar to that of private businesses, to <br />directly negotiate contracts. The <br />Legislature should establish a task force <br />to review municipal contracting laws, and <br />consider contracting and purchasing <br />reforms that give cities the flexibility to <br />provide quality goods and services at the <br />lowest cost to taxpayers. <br />SD-18. City Enterprise Operations <br />Issue: Historically, city enterprise <br />operations have been created in response to <br />community needs, lack of a private market, <br />financial reporting requirements, state and <br />federal mandates, to enforce state and local <br />law, and to ensure a quality of life for the <br />residents of a community. Establishing an <br />enterprise operation allows a city to provide <br />a desired service while maintaining financial <br />control over service levels, costs, and public <br />inputs. <br />In some cases, enterprise operations produce <br />general public benefits and may require <br />public support to ensure a desired level of <br />service at a reasonable cost. The benefits of <br />an enterprise operation, therefore, should be <br />evaluated not solely in terms of profitability <br />but also on the service benefits to citizens of <br />the community. <br />League of Minnesota Cities <br />2015 City Policies Page 11 <br />