07-19-2007 Charter Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Objective Criteria Used to Evaluate Each Option The Citizen's Task Force evaluated options in terms of the degree to which they resolve the issue in a responsible manner, giving the city the ability to allow reasonable public input into the reconstruction process while at the same time allowing the City Council to exercise its fiduciary and stewardship duties to preserve the public's investment in infrastructure so that it is safe and well-managed. 1. Do nothing is not an option. The status quo does not deal with the problem. The city has adopted policies that provide for the management of the city's infrastructure in the most responsible and cost-effective manner possible, yet it is unable to fully implement its policies because of provisions in Section 8 that force local improvement projects to a citywide vote. As a result, streets in poor condition remain in poor condition threatening: o Safe and efficient travel o Property values o The City's attractiveness and desirability In addition, the city is unable to access widely used funding resources, which impacts the City's ability to minimize costs to property owners and taxpayers. 2. Financing through other methods, while available to the Council, is not fiscally prudent. 3. The Citizen's Task Force supports amending the charter. The current requirement for a citywide vote on each specific localized reconstruction project only frustrates the ability of the Council and property owners to work out their differences. Recommendation of Citizen's Task Force It is the conclusion of the Citizen's Task Force that provisions of Section 8 of the Lino Lakes City Charter do limit the City Council's authority and ability to reconstruct roads in the most responsible, timely and cost-effective manner. Wording of Section 8 must be changed to allow the city to move forward with its Pavement Management Plan and its recommended financing formula. Also, any process pertaining to reconstruction or public improvements should allow opportunities for reasonable public input and a constructive dialogue between affected property owners and City Council/City administration. We recommend that Section 8 be amended to remove the citywide referenda. Instead, we offer an alternative that would still give citizens—those directly affected by the project— the final say as to whether or not an improvement project is allowed. We propose the opportunity for a neighborhood veto. Property owners directly affected by the project rather than voters across the city would be able to turn down a project. We do not feel that this recommendation takes away the voice of Lino Lakes' citizens. In fact, we believe it will protect and even strengthen the voice of citizens directly affected 9