Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Bendtsen stated that perhaps the special assessment level should also be set at 20 <br /> percent. <br /> Chairperson Field noted that currently the assessment level is set at up to 50 percent and did not <br /> believe that the Charter Commission should move forward with removing the option to utilize <br /> franchise fees as well as lower the ability to assess. <br /> City Administrator Ulrich explained the process for assessment and noted that a project could not <br /> be assessed for more than the value of benefit to the property. He also explained the process for <br /> bonding and noted that prior to a special assessment the applicable residents are notified for a <br /> public hearing. <br /> Commissioner Niska referenced the proposed amendment from staff, specifically in regard to <br /> limiting special assessments and the effect that would have. <br /> City Attorney Langel noted that the intent of that amendment would be to ensure that residents <br /> cannot be billed twice, through assessment and franchise fees. He explained that if the franchise <br /> fee fund was used for road improvements, that would mean that the assessment could not occur <br /> and the bonding could not be obtained. He stated that the intent is to gather the franchise fees for <br /> this use and this use only during the five-year period and noted that the assessments could not <br /> occur during that time. He noted that the utility company actually places a limit of five percent <br /> of the utility company's gross revenues on the franchise fee in order to limit that tool. <br /> Commissioner Sivertson stated that if the Commission were to compromise on the draft <br /> proposed by the Council, perhaps the time period should be limited to one year, after which time <br /> the Council would be forced to budget for that aspect. <br /> Commissioner Deemer noted that there are four franchises in the City and wanted to ensure that <br /> the document would ensure that the fourth franchise is not created for cable television. <br /> Commissioner Niska noted that the State Statute would limit this franchise use to electric and gas <br /> and would not apply to cable television. <br /> Commissioner Anderson questioned if a franchise fee must be one pool of money or whether the <br /> specific purpose could be identified. <br /> City Attorney Langel noted that the State Statute does not limit how the City pools the money <br /> and explained that the City Council proposed this language, for the funds to be used only for this <br /> purpose, in order to incorporate the input from the Charter Commission. <br /> Commissioner Bendtsen noted that this franchise fee would be applied equally to all properties <br /> and would not be applied based on property values. He stated that this is a tax and believed, as <br /> proposed, that this is unfair as it should be tied to the value of the property. <br /> Charter Commission/January 27,2014 <br /> Page 5 of 10 <br />