Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
2. Safety and Liability Concerns <br />Streets that are in poor condition may be dangerous creating a public safety hazard that <br />could result in costly litigation for the city. <br />3. Public Support for Changing the Charter <br />In the 2006 Quality of Life Survey, residents favored a charter change to deal with road <br />reconstruction by a margin of 60% to 20 %. Concerning street conditions, 72% rated the <br />overall condition of city streets as excellent or good in 1996. Ten years later, the <br />excellent or good rating dropped to 53 %. <br />Pertinent information and data garnered from research and input from city staff, <br />Council, experts, Charter Commission and the Community <br />• Pavement Management Plan <br />Lino Lakes now has a comprehensive plan for road maintenance and <br />reconstruction.' The Pavement Management Report (available at www.ci.lino- <br />lakes.mn.us) documents the condition of each street and provides a 10 -year <br />maintenance and reconstruction schedule. The Pavement Management Report, <br />along with the city's pavement management policies (see Appendix C) and <br />financing recommendations (see Appendix A) make up the city's Pavement <br />Management Plan. <br />The PMP shows that when roads are maintained and reconstructed of the right <br />time, the city saves money in the long run. <br />The city is funding maintenance (seal coat and overlay) through an annual <br />property tax levy so that portion of the Pavement Management Plan is on target. <br />The reconstruction portion (removal and replacement) is stalled because, under <br />provisions of Section 8 the City Charter that force a citywide vote, the <br />recommended financing formula is subject to referendum. Two referenda have <br />been unsuccessful, compounding the problem and furthering Council's inability to <br />follow the PMP. <br />• Financing methods available for improvements <br />The charter provision only requires referendum if special assessments are used to <br />fund part of a road reconstruction project. There are other methods of financing <br />available to the city but these methods are more costly and would increase <br />dramatically the burden on taxpayers. This should be a concern to the taxpayer <br />because if City Charter restrictions are not removed, more expensive financing <br />methods may be the only option for the Council. <br />Figure 3 on the following page illustrates alternative financing methods, including <br />funding a public improvement through an annual property tax levy only. It would <br />be one way to avoid a citywide election but it is a more expensive option. Note <br />the sharp increase in property taxes; compared to the small, gradual increases in <br />the financing alternative presented in the Pavement. Management Plan. Also, an <br />action by the Legislature to enact levy limits may reduce the Council's ability to <br />use property tax levies as a financing mechanism. <br />4 <br />