My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-13-2002 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
11-13-2002 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/13/2014 2:23:08 PM
Creation date
5/11/2012 2:52:54 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
230
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
1 the passage by Congress of legislation restraining new federal mandates, should help address the <br />2 problem, but other steps are necessary. <br />3 <br />4 Response: <br />5 <br />6 • Existing unfunded mandates should be reviewed and modified or repealed where <br />7 possible. <br />8 • No additional statewide mandates should be enacted, unless full funding for the <br />9 mandate is provided by the level of government imposing it or a permanent stable <br />10 revenue source is established. <br />11 • Cities should not be forced to comply with unfunded mandates. <br />12 • Cities should be given the greatest flexibility possible in implementing mandates to <br />13 ensure their cost is minimized. <br />14 <br />15 SD -3. City Costs for Enforcing State and Local Laws (AF) <br />16 <br />17 Issue: Cities experience substantial costs enforcing state and local laws, particularly <br />18 those related to traffic, controlled substances, and incarceration of prisoners. The current method <br />19 in our criminal justice system of recovering costs for law enforcement and prosecution through <br />20 fines is insufficient to meet the costs incurred by local governments. <br />21 <br />22 Response: The Legislature should review this issue and adopt measures that <br />23 provide for complete reimbursement of the costs incurred by local governments in <br />24 enforcing state and local laws. Solutions that should be considered include the following: <br />25 <br />26 • Increasing fine amounts. <br />27 • Removing or modifying county and state surcharges that conflict with cost recovery <br />28 principles. <br />29 • Requiring the defendant to pay the full costs of enforcement and prosecution as part of <br />30 any sentence. <br />31 <br />32 SD -4. Design -build (AF) <br />33 <br />34 Issue: The standard bid procedure cities are required to use in selecting contractors for <br />35 municipal buildings can be quite costly. Private sector development uses a process known as <br />36 "design- build" in which various filers submit project proposals that include both a design and the <br />37 construction costs for that design. The selection is then based on the total package. By granting <br />38 specific statutory authority to use the design -build alternative to the Metropolitan Sports <br />39 Facilities Commission and state agencies, including the Dept. of Revenue, the Legislature has <br />40 recognized the financial savings it can provide. In documented instances, cities have saved <br />41 taxpayers up to 10 percent of the total project cost by using the design -build alternative. <br />42 <br />43 The design -build process also permits improved project management and oversight. <br />44 However, absent statutory authorization to use this alternative, cities are vulnerable to lawsuits <br />45 from unsuccessful bidders. In addition, the design -build process for playground equipment can <br />46 encourage greater creativity while maintaining cost controls. Special legislation was enacted for <br />77 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.