Agenda - Council - 01/12/1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I '1 I I i I I I I I I I I, DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES I-1. Philosophy (A) The sixties and seventies taught that natural resources are limited and government spending is finite. Community development planning was recognized as necessary to focus local energies in a constructive manner. Developmental and fiscal tools were created and legislated, and technical competence was acquired to implement these policies. Governmental funding was poured into the community development process. The eighties should be a decade of action. With the focus, funding, tools, technical compe- tence, and motivation to act, we must coordinately' and channel our efforts. We are in transition from a "throw-away" society to a "reuse and recycle" society. We cannot afford to waste the substantial capital investment already made by cities and pri- vate sector. We must build on this investment: to reinvest, to the extent possible, in our existing cities with their in-place infrastructures; and to manage our economic growth in a manner that will maximize the use of this investment in order to hold down the cost of public and private ser- vices and energy necessary to support this econo- mic growth. Each year the legislature passes laws that have substantial impact on the development and re- development of cities. Many of these laws work at cross purposes because the state has not articulated a community development policy to serve as a framework for evaluating both the direct and spin- off effects of legislative, administrative, and judi- cial decisions affectin§ community development. Although elements of policy currently exist, these elements need to be put together into a coherent policy. By so doing, laws working at cross pur- poses can be eliminated and areas where new legislation is needed can be identified. This action must occur within a solid partner- ship of cities, the state and the federal government, working together with business, labor, and neigh- borhoods. By being included within the process, the private sector will learn that it can profit by investing within a locally planned and implemented framework, and that the cost of public services within a reinvestment structure will be less expen- sive to their businesses than will unstructured growth. -1- I-2. Community Development (A) To meet the objective of community develop- ment we recognize that economic growth is es- sential. The League recommends that such a community development policy be articulated and that it include the following elements: o To target and manage economic growth, insofar as possible, toward meeting the objective of community development. For the state to encourage the preservation of agricultural lands, wetlands, scenic and recreational land, and to promote conservation activities. To direct policy towards the revitalization of existing cities and community centers in order to reverse the trend of dispersion of population and economic activity. For the state to provide positive and nega- tive incentives to encourage, community focus for development. For the state to coordinate state investment programs in such a manner so as to facilitate and encourage community development er- forts of cities. For the state to work in close cooperation with local governments and the private sector to facilitate local objectives, wher- ever possible. 7. For the state to enable cities, to the extent possible, to solve their own problems. I-3. Industrial Revenue Bonds (A) ~ The League supports the policy of this state to encourage cities to take an active role in their economic development and redevelopment. This policy is particularly expressed in Chapter 474 of the Minnesota Statutes, the Municipal Indus- trial Development Act. Chapter 474 provides of the use of industrial revenue bonds by local units of government to prevent or remove blight and economic deterioration, to create new jobs and retain existing ones, to maintain and streng- then tax bases, and to retain existing businesses and attract new business.