My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-26-2003 Council Workshop Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
03-26-2003 Council Workshop Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:27:19 PM
Creation date
7/18/2008 3:28:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUT);S <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />MARCH 26, 2003 <br />The City Administrator suggested that the fees collected could be <br />earmarked for the City's Infrastructure Fund given that all property <br />owners in the City utilize the street system. The levy dollars freed up <br />could then be used in the General Fund. <br />Blesener felt that the surcharge should be implemented as soon as <br />possible, but suggested the amount should be 2% to 3% to minimize the <br />impact on consumers. Blesener also indicated that he did not support the <br />recommendations relative to the Cable TV Fund, the 10% Fund, or <br />sponsorship of recreation programs through charitable gambling funding. <br />The City Administrator agreed that it was risky to become dependent on <br />funding from unstable sources. <br />Anderson felt that a 5% surcharge would be supportable given the huge <br />budget crisis that exists. <br />Fahey suggested that the first step would be to obtain a legal opinion from <br />the City Attorney as well as determine the flexibility that the City might <br />have in looking at this fee on an annual basis. <br />Anderson also felt that it would be important to communicate the <br />implementation of this fee to property owners as well as the reasons for <br />the fee. Information on ways to conserve energy would also be important <br />to convey to consumers. <br />The City Administrator indicated that in the past Xcel Energy had been <br />resistant to cities imposing franchise fees. However, given the current <br />budget situation, many cities are looking at these fees as a source of <br />revenue. Therefore, Xcel is now developing policies and procedures for <br />addressing the matter in a more cooperative fashion. <br />Fahey pointed out that Little Canada is awell-run city that provides <br />excellenC services in a very cost-effective manner. Fahey indicated that he <br />did not support cutting services, and a franchise fee on gas and electric is <br />one way to prevent a cut in City services. <br />Anderson suggested that in negotiating a franchise fee with Xcel, the <br />City's trail system should be discussed in relation to the easements that are <br />needed to complete the system. The City Administrator agreed and also <br />indicated that negotiations will include discuss on other issues such as <br />relocation of utilities. <br />Council directed the City Administrator to obtain a legal opinion from the <br />City Attorney on this issue as well as research the issue and provide a <br />detailed recommendatiat to the Council as soon as possible. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.