Minutes - 1999/06/28 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Attorney Long stated that this ordinance was the result of discussion which had taken place at the Council's Work Session. He stated that it provided for an interim ordinance, or • moratorium, which granted new franchise ordinances or an extension of an ordinance, as in the case of Reliant Energy Mmnegasco. He stated that the moratorium could specify a date, or run until the final adoption of an amended ordinance to regulate rights-of--way. He stated that it had been the consensus of the Council to have this moratorium in place until the rights-of--way ordinance was adopted and implemented. He noted that moratoriums are routinely upheld in relation to land use issues, and there is a relative land use in terms ofrights-of--way excavations. He stated that they could extend a time period for up to one year, by statute, and he believed that any lesser time period would certainly be upheld. He stated that he had not heard of this type of moratorium being utilized in conjunction with a franchise issue, but it was possible through the land use authorization in Minnesota Statutes. City Attorney Long stated that the Council has the Second Reading of the rights-of--way ordinance before them at the present meeting and he would recommend laying the item over, as it would probably require amendments. He stated that aright-of--way ordinance could be adopted within thirty to sixty days. He noted, however, that implementation of the ordinance may require a longer period of time. Mayor Coughlin closed the Public Hearing at 8:34 p.m. Mayor Coughlin asked if the phrase "final adoption and implementation" should be added to • page 2, Subparagraph 2, which indicates "or until final adoption of an amended ordinance." City Attorney Long stated that if the right-of--way ordinance is adopted, implementation steps are required for review of a permit when it comes forward, and the addition of this language might not be necessary. He stated, however, that the question would be whether to set a time frame or leave it until the final adoption of the amended ordinance. He reiterated that the moratorium could not extend beyond one year. Mayor Coughlin stated that he would be in favor of aninety-day moratorium, adding that this would provide an adequate amount of time for discussion. Council Member Marty asked City Attorney Long and Acting Administrator Ulrich if everything could be accomplished within ninety days. City Attorney Long stated that he thought this would be a reasonable amount of time. Acting Administrator Ulrich stated that they could attempt to complete their study, and get the franchise fees and other matters in order during that time period. Council Member Stigney asked if it would be possible to extend the moratorium in the event that Public Works Director Ulrich was to have difficulty meeting the deadline. City Attorney Long stated that if they were aware of the need for an extension, possibly two weeks ahead of time, they could extend the moratorium by up to nine months. • 14N:\DATA\USERSUOANB\SHARE\M INUTES\CC\1999\06-28-99.CC