Laserfiche WebLink
Make clear the 60 -day time limit begins at the point when a formal complete written <br />! application is received on forms provided by the city with appropriate additional <br />3 supporting documents and including the payment of fees if necessary. <br />4 ® Increase the initial time limit to 90 days for municipalities with less than 5,000 <br />5 population. <br />6 <br />7 LE -4. Public Infrastructure Utilities (RS) <br />8 <br />9 Issue: Current infrastructure funding options available to cities are inadequate. Existing <br />10 special assessment law, Chapter 429, does not meet cities' financing needs because of the benefit <br />11 requirement. The law requires a minimum of 20 percent of such a project to be specially assessed <br />12 against affected properties. In practice, however, proof of increased property value to this degree <br />13 of benefit can rarely be proven from regular repair or replacement of existing infrastructure such <br />14 as streets or sidewalks. Alternatives to the Chapter 429 methods for financing infrastructure <br />15 improvements are nearly nonexistent. <br />16 <br />17 The Legislature has given cities the authority to operate utilities for waterworks, sanitary <br />18 sewers, and storm sewers. The storm sewer authority, established in 1983, set the precedent for a <br />19 workable process of charging a use fee on a utility bill for a city service infrastructure that is of <br />20 value to all those in a city. Similar to the storm sewer authority, a transportation or sidewalk <br />21 utility would use technical, well - founded measurements and would equitably distribute the costs <br />of local infrastructure services. <br />24 Response: The Legislature should authorize cities to create, as a local option, <br />25 additional utilities such as a transportation or sidewalk utility. Such authority would <br />26 acknowledge: the effects of repeated levy limits and the general funding shift from the state <br />27 to local governments for building and maintaining necessary infrastructure; the benefits to <br />28 all taxpayers of a properly maintained public infrastructure; and, the limitations of <br />29 existing special assessment authority. <br />30 <br />31 LE -5. Development Fee Disputes (RS) <br />32 <br />33 Issue: State law is clear that fees collected under Minn. Stat. § 462 are eligible for <br />34 judicial review in the event a dispute over the fee arises. The law is not clear what notice <br />35 requirements to the municipality are necessary relative to the timing for an aggrieved person to <br />36 seek review. <br />37 <br />38 Response: The Legislature should amend Minn. Stat. § 462.361 to establish a 60 -day <br />39 time limitation in which an aggrieved person may bring an action against the municipality. <br />iQ <br />LE-6. Housing (AID) <br />43 Issue: The roles of federal and state government are critical to assist cities in responding <br />to the critical lack of both rental and single - family housing for those priced out of the market. <br />'hi The federal government has largely removed itself from providing direct funding and subsidies <br />46 for housing production. <br />9 <br />