Laserfiche WebLink
utility or telecommunications <br />provider. <br />LE-19. Wireless Infrastructure and <br />Equipment Siting <br />Issue: Demand for wireless communication <br />service has increased requests by private and <br />public sector providers to site additional <br />towers, antennas, small cells and other <br />facilities in cities. It is anticipated that <br />applications to install small cell wireless <br />facilities and distributed antenna systems <br />(DAS) will continue to grow as technology <br />evolves over time. Despite Minnesota's new <br />law creating a special process for the siting <br />of small wireless facilities, maintaining <br />cities' local zoning authority and police <br />power to manage and coordinate the siting <br />of these facilities continue is necessary and <br />appropriate. <br />Response: Cities must continue to exercise <br />full authority to consider public health, <br />safety, and welfare concerns in <br />responding to requests to site, upgrade or <br />alter wireless facilities. The Legislature <br />should not place further restrictions on <br />city authority to manage the siting of <br />wireless facilities in the public right-of- <br />way nor enact compensation restrictions <br />that would result in local government <br />subsidization of wireless providers. <br />Furthermore, cities must have recourse to <br />require removal by the provider of <br />equipment deemed abandoned. <br />LE-20. County Economic <br />Development Authorities <br />Issue: The 2005 Legislature authorized all <br />counties outside the metropolitan area to <br />establish county economic development <br />authorities (EDAs). Minn. Stat. § 469.1082 <br />provides specificity on certain process and <br />limitations issues. County EDA activity in <br />areas surrounding cities will directly impact <br />the adjacent city in terms of service <br />provision and taxes. <br />Response: The Legislature should require <br />city approval for proposed county EDA <br />activities within two miles of a city. <br />LE-21. Local Appropriations to <br />Economic Development <br />Organizations <br />Issue: Cities and towns are allowed to <br />appropriate up to $50,000 per year from <br />general fund revenue to an incorporated <br />development society or organization for <br />"promoting, advertising, improving, or <br />developing the economic and agricultural <br />resources" of the city or town. The $50,000 <br />cap has been in place since 1989 and places <br />unnecessary restrictions on a city's ability to <br />work with non-profit development <br />corporations. Local governments should <br />have the flexibility to work with outside <br />organizations if local leaders believe it is in <br />the best interest of their communities to do <br />so. Such appropriations are subject to the <br />same budgetary oversight as other <br />government expenditures, and local elected <br />officials are ultimately responsible to the <br />voters for how local tax dollars are spent. <br />Response: The Legislature should amend <br />Minn. Stat. § 469.191 to eliminate or <br />increase the cap on appropriations to <br />incorporated development societies or <br />organizations. <br />LE-22. Workforce Readiness <br />Issue: It is critical for the future of our <br />economy to prepare for new demographic <br />trends. While population rates among <br />communities of color are projected to <br />increase, the unemployment rate for <br />communities of color exceed the <br />unemployment rate for white Minnesotans. <br />League of Minnesota Cities <br />2018 City Policies Page 65 <br />