Laserfiche WebLink
COMMITTEE STRUCTURE AND POLICY ADOPTION PROCESS <br />The Association currently follows a procedure whereby potential legislative <br />policies are brought forth and considered for adoption in the five standing <br />policy committees (revenues, metropolitan agencies, transportation, housing and <br />economic development, general legislation). As indicated earlier, the Associ- <br />ation currently has over 100 adopted legislative policies. The policies have <br />been divided into categories as to level of effort in lobbying. <br />The AMM now finds itself actively involved in issues that are not limited in <br />interest to the metropolitan area, even where our positions are similar to those <br />of cities in Greater Minnesota. The best recent example is pay equity, where <br />the AMM position is almost identical to that of the League of Minnesota Cities. <br />Yet because of the high visibility and strong feelings surrounding this issue, <br />many member cities expected the AMM staff to be active in lobbying on this issue. <br />There is also the dilemma of issues that are of interest to a single city, or a <br />limited number of cities. The AMM Board and staff have attempted to be respon- <br />sive to the needs of each member city, but a question is raised as to whether it <br />is fair to take time and resources away from issues that are of more importance <br />to the broader membership. <br />The Task Force discussed at length what to do about issues that are divisive <br />among our own members, forexample fiscal disparities or funding for combined <br />sewer overflow abatement. A majority of the committee concluded that the AMM <br />should not avoid taking definitive positions on these issues, as it would be <br />left neutralized on issues of high importance to a large number of city offi- <br />cials and thereby foster the growth of still more splinter groups. <br />Finally, the Task Force examined the five standing policy committees, concluding <br />that they are working well and that none should be eliminated. In fact, it was <br />speculated that as new social and legislative problems appear (i.e. the drug <br />crisis) there will likely be a need for additional standing or ad hoc committees. <br />The Task Force further suggests that there may be utility in having a broad - <br />based "futures" committee to simply help the organization anticipate and be <br />prepared for pending issues. <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br />1. The Association needs to focus most of its resources and effort on the few <br />issues of very highest priority to the entire membership. At the same <br />time, the AMM should not narrow its agenda to the point that it loses the <br />interest and support of its broad base of cities. <br />2. In order to accommodate the legitimate interests of all member cities, we <br />recommend that AMM create an "endorsed" category of policies. These would <br />be policies of interest to a limited number of cities, or those where the <br />League of Minnesota Cities or some other group might reasonably be expected <br />to adequately represent the interests of metropolitan cities. With the AMM <br />"endorsement", the AMM would be officially on record as supporting these <br />policies, but not actively involved in lobbying or initiating legislation. <br />- 7 - <br />