Laserfiche WebLink
has already been established for 2014 but that could be changed for subsequent years through the <br />ordinance process. <br />Commissioner Zaetsch stated the City has traditionally borrowed from reserve funds for different <br />purposes. He asked whether it would be feasible for the City to borrow from a reserve fund if <br />there is a shortfall rather than instituting a franchise fee. City Administrator Ulrich the City has a <br />variety of borrowing mechanisms at its disposal, but any funds would have to be repaid. <br />Commissioner Anderson stated, in her opinion, it is not the intent of State Statute to obligate a <br />utility to pay fees to a municipality to raise money based on its operations. She added it <br />represents a "plus or minus" scenario, with a raise in revenue defraying increased municipal <br />costs. She noted the Commission should be reviewing utility operations rather than trying to find <br />a loophole for raising money, as there is no adequate nexus between utilities regulations and road <br />repairs. She stressed the importance of maintaining roads for all residents. Chairperson Field <br />agreed. <br />Commissioner Bendtsen agreed, stating franchise fees should be tied to a utility improvement <br />value. He noted he would support an amendment to lower assessments and require a super <br />majority vote to block a project. Chairperson Field stated spending and taxation fall under the <br />Council's control. He expressed concern that there would be no limitations on a franchise fee <br />with regard to how long it would be in place, or purposes for which the funds would be used. <br />Commissioner Niska stated an amendment could include the language in State Statute 216b.36 <br />regarding franchise fees, and reflect the fact that an election might result under certain <br />circumstances. He added the fees could only be used to defray increased municipal costs as a <br />result of utility operations. <br />City Attorney Langel stated the Commission could provide an amendment to include a special <br />election, or submit the amended Charter language to the Council for their discussion and <br />feedback. He noted the Charter amendment would require a unanimous vote of the Council. He <br />added it would be helpful to have the Council's input before the City undertakes the cost of a <br />special election. <br />Commissioner Niska agreed, stating the motion to amend the Charter would initiate an exchange <br />with the Council, and they could review the issue and provide feedback to the Commission. <br />Commissioner Anderson asked whether staff had reviewed Charter language from other <br />municipalities that have implemented franchise fees. <br />Chairperson Field agreed that would be helpful. <br />Commissioner Deemer stated the Council could review this issue at their October 22 meeting. <br />Commissioner Niska stated a 30 -day notice is required. <br />Commissioner Deemer stated the Council should review this issue as soon as possible. <br />Charter Commission /October 21, 2013 <br />Page 8 of 11 <br />