Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 01-30-1996 SpecialMINUTES SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING JOINT MEETING WITH LEGISLATORS JANUARY 30, 1996 A special meeting of the Plymouth City Council was called to order by Mayor Tierney at 6:35 p.m. in the Public Safety Training Room, 3400 Plymouth Blvd., on January 30, 1996. COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Tierney; Councilmembers Anderson, Wold, Lymangood, Preus, and Black. ABSENT: Councilmember Granath. LEGISLATORS PRESENT: Representatives Abrams, Leppik, Stanek, and Van Dellen. STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Johnson, Assistant City Manager Lueckert, Community Development Director Hurlburt, Public Works Director Moore, Public Safety Director Gerdes, Finance Director Hahn, Park Director Blank, HRA Supervisor Goldsmith, Transit Administrator Sweeney, and City Clerk Ahrens. TRANSIT ISSUES Public Works Director Moore explained that in the summer, 1995, Plymouth was informed by the Metropolitan Council that due to funding shortfalls, paratransit service would be discontinued for seven opt -out communities, including Plymouth, on October 1. They further stated that they would negotiate with the communities to provide service, and agreed to continue service in Plymouth at a split cost through June, 1996. Plymouth pays for all riders who board the service in Plymouth; the Metropolitan Council pays for all riders who board elsewhere and ride into Plymouth. This results in Plymouth paying for the paratransit service with local property tax dollars, while other communities receive the service through state funding. Mayor Tierney discussed bills currently under consideration. She said that Plymouth has joined the Suburban Transit Association in order to lobby the legislature on needs and concerns of transit opt -out communities. She believes that the opt -out communities have done a fine job of providing transit in areas of low density with many miles to be traveled. She stated that Plymouth supports state funding for paratransit service. City Manager Johnson explained that Plymouth is one of the few cities who, are paying twice for the service -- first through the local property tax and again through the income tax. He stated that Plymouth agreed to a nine-month negotiated contract with the Metropolitan Council in order to continue the Special Council Meeting January 30, 1996 Page 2 paratransit service through the end of June, 1996. If nothing can be done by then, Plymouth faces the options of continuing the service with Plymouth citizens paying twice, or attempting a local limited program. He warned that if communities begin offering their own paratransit services, a seamless service would be no longer possible in the metro area. Passengers could be faced with situations of transfers at each City border. Representative Abrams stated that the City of Minnetonka would also like to opt - out. As the transit system is redesigned, he predicted that many suburbs will experience problems. Many legislators do not want to allow opt -outs, and paratransit service is extraordinarily expensive to provide. He stated that a supplemental appropriation to Metro Mobility, which provides paratransit service in the metro area, may help with the problem. City Manager Johnson stated that there is also a fairness issue involved. Plymouth residents should not pay income tax that funds the service elsewhere, and local property tax to get the service in Plymouth. Representative Abrams agreed that it is unfair for Plymouth residents to pay twice for the service. He believes that the best immediate strategy is to attempt to get a supplemental appropriation for the Metro Mobility system. He stated that $100 million is currently being spent for a metro -wide paratransit service, and a long- term solution will be needed. Representative Van Dellen agreed that a $10 million supplemental appropriation for Metro Mobility may cover the immediate problem; however, the issues of treating all cities the same and opt -outs will still need to be addressed. Representative Stanek offered to research whether the appropriations bill currently includes the $10 million supplemental appropriation for Metro Mobility or whether an amendment will be needed. City Manager Johnson will serve as the City contact on the issue. Councilmember Wold stated that the entire issue will need to be addressed in the future. Representative Leppik asked if Plymouth would prefer to be included in the Metro Mobility service or completely out of it and able to collaborate with other similar outer -ring suburbs. Manager Johnson stated that Plymouth would prefer not to have cities each offering a separate service. It may not be financially feasible to have a metro -wide paratransit service in the future, but a county by county system should be maintained. He stated that Plymouth has over 40,000 jobs and many individuals use the service to get from their homes in other cities to get to their job, as well as Plymouth residents traveling to jobs in other communities. He stated that Special Council Meeting January 30, 1996 Page 3 Plymouth is currently paying $310,000 for nine months of paratransit service. Plymouth residents are taxed about $1.8 million for transit services. Transit Administrator Sweeney noted that Plymouth is currently averaging 2,500 to 3,000 paratransit trips per month. Representative Van Dellen invited the staff to provide legislators with information that they could use to develop parameters under which they could require the Metropolitan Council to develop a plan for 1997. HOUSING GOALS AND LIVABLE COMMUNITIES Community Development Director Hurlburt updated legislators on Plymouth's implementation of the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. The next step is for each City that has adopted goals to adopt an action plan. She stated that an issue has arisen with regard to implementation. The Metropolitan Council is developing procedures and criteria for the application process. She stated that there is currently a proposal that "a community must have met or exceeded its Metropolitan Council established benchmark for affordable rental housing in order to be eligible to receive funding for homeownership projects." She said that originally, each community was to adopt goals to meet their needs. Under this new criteria, the ability to even apply for funding would be tied to meeting the rental housing benchmarks. She stated that the benchmarks would be those established metro -wide by the Metropolitan Council -- not Plymouth's established benchmarks. She believes that these would be impossible for Plymouth to meet because an estimated 1,300 to 1,400 new affordable units would be required to meet the benchmark. Plymouth would be shut out of trying to meet some of the City's ownership needs until rental housing benchmarks are met. She stated that this is a Metropolitan Council staff and Committee recommendation at this point, with final action expected by the Metropolitan Council. HRA Supervisor Goldsmith further explained the Committee process that resulted in a recommendation of this criteria. Representative Abrams requested that staff provide him with specific information on the proposed criteria, as well as the affected programs. He served on the Legislative Conference Committee that developed the language for the Metropolitan Livable Communities Act. He stated that this proposal does not meet the intent of the legislation and appears to be a breach of faith. Representative Abrams stated the intent of the legislation was for cities to check their housing stock and develop a plan for life -cycle housing and a diverse community. It appears that cities that participated in the process now may be penalized. Upon receipt of additional information from City staff, he will author a joint delegation letter stating that the proposed criteria is unacceptable. Special Council Meeting January 30, 1996 Page 4 Councilmember Wold requested that staff provide the City Council with the appropriate Metropolitan Council staff contacts in order to voice objections with the proposed criteria. Mayor Tierney suggested that the information also be shared with other affected cities and lobbying organizations. Councilmember Anderson shared a copy of a recent Star Tribune article that indicates the Twin Cities area to have the most affordable housing of 18 metro areas in the United States. Community Development Director Hurlburt asked legislators for support of a law change necessary for Plymouth to continue to participate in an MHFA funded program for first-time home buyers. WETLANDS ACT PROPOSALS Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that there are several pending bills which would amend the Wetlands Protection Act. Early in 1995, Plymouth conducted an extensive project to document and evaluate the function and quality of its wetlands. The City adopted a wetland protection ordinance which provides for buffers and setbacks around all wetlands. She stated that the City relies heavily on the Wetland Conservation Act as the backbone for the local ordinance. The City has an interest in any proposed changes in the law. She noted that over 20 percent of Plymouth's land area is wetlands. Councilmember Black stated that a Conference Committee has been appointed for last year's bill, and that the governor has indicated that he finds nothing wrong with the previously enacted legislation. Representative Abrams agreed that the current wetlands law is fine. Representative Leppik explained that certain counties in northern Minnesota are lobbying heavily for major changes in the wetlands law. Some of the proposed changes are fine for that area, but the problem is that any changes would apply state-wide. Community Development Director Hurlburt stated that she will provide information to Representative Leppik on Plymouth wetland acreages and types, as well as a copy of Plymouth's wetland ordinance. Representative Leppik stated that she mentioned Plymouth's wetland ordinance in a recent Committee meeting. She questioned how the proposals for wetland legislative changes would impact a community like Plymouth that really wants to protect its wetlands. Councilmember Preus noted that it is difficult for the City when it has to continually re-evaluate issues, such as its wetland ordinance, due to state law changes. Special Council Meeting January 30, 1996 Page 5 TAX BASE EQUALIZATION City Manager Johnson stated that Representative Orfield has introduced legislation on tax base equalization. The effect of this bill would be to raise property taxes in cities like Plymouth which have substantial residential homestead market value over $200,000. He believes that this could result in an automatic estimated 10 percent tax increase in Plymouth. An increase in property taxes would adversely impact the City's ability to meet affordable housing goals. The proposed legislation does not base increases or decreases in property tax on a household's ability to pay; and the net effect would be that low income households in the suburbs would face a property tax increase while wealthy homeowners in St. Paul would experience a property tax decrease. It would actually make Plymouth's housing stock less affordable. He said that the legislation also assumes that communities pays taxes - not homeowners. The burden would falls unfairly on residents with lower valued homes. It may also discourage development, since cities would be penalized for adding value to the community. The City strongly opposes tax base equalization legislation. Representative Abrams felt it was unlikely that Representative Orfield's bill will move forward. If it does go forward, it will have the same result as last year. Representative Van Dellen concurred. Finance Director Hahn stated that the City is interested in any legislation that may apply to existing tax increment financing districts. Representative Abrams stated that only technical clean-ups are proposed for tax increment financing this session. ELECTIONS Councilmember Lymangood referenced a state law that prohibits campaigning on election day. He noted that the Attorney General has declared this law unconstitutional, and the Hennepin County Attorney indicates that prosecutions will not be made under that law. Representative Abrams stated that the Attorney General did not act on the law so that it would be state-wide, but rather is handled on a county by county basis. Representative Abrams provided background on a provision that was included in the Marty Act in 1993 which required response time when attack letters are published prior to an election. He stated that the provision was challenged by two organizations. Assistant City Manager Lueckert stated that the City would prefer that if a referendum on the Metropolitan Sports Facilities is held during 1996, that it be conducted with the September primary or November general election. In addition to the significant expense of a special election, it is increasingly difficult to obtain Special Council Meeting January 30, 1996 Page 6 election judges. She also stated that Plymouth would oppose any legislation that may be introduced which would require cities, counties, and school districts to hold elections only odd -numbered years. She explained that the City Charter calls for elections in even -numbered years. This was done to assure a good turnout and to save costs. The City is also interested in legislation that would streamline the absentee voting process. Representative Abrams stated that he was co-author of a bill which moved city and school elections to November. There were elections on 56 days in one year in Ramsey County; and school districts with less than 1 percent voter turnout in May elections. However, he would not support legislation that designated even or odd - numbered years. He believes that is a decision for cities and schools to make. Mayor Tierney stated that the City's Charter Commission was split on the issue of whether even or odd -year elections should be held. Councilmember Wold stated that it is a local issue and should be decided by each City or school district. Representative Abrams reported on the progress with the absentee balloting bill. He has met several times with the Secretary of State to negotiate items in the bill. He stated that the current absentee process is asking a lot of election administrators around the state. MINORS ACCESS TO TOBACCO City Manager Johnson stated that there is proposed legislation relating to minors' access to tobacco that would prevent cities from adopting stricter regulations than state law. Councilmember Wold explained that an article in the Wayzata school paper indicated that 80 percent of the students either smoke or use drugs. He stated that Plymouth has been doing compliance checks on licensed liquor establishments and intends to do the same with cigarette licensees. Representative Leppik asked if Plymouth currently has ordinances that are more stringent than state law. Public Safety Director Gerdes stated that the City has recently received a grant to work with surrounding communities on the issue of minors' access to tobacco which will include development of an ordinance. He stated that Plymouth recently increased the cigarette license fees to fund the compliance and educational component. Representative Abrams stated that legislators may be faced with a difficult situation. It is likely that the vote to take out pre-emption would occur first. If that vote should fail, the remaining state law would still be far more restrictive than the existing state law. He asked if the City would still request that he support the legislation if pre-emption is included. Public Safety Director Gerdes stated that this is good legislation, except for the pre-emption clause. He stated that the pre- emption is proposed to be effective immediately. Perhaps an option would be for Special Council Meeting January 30, 1996 Page 7 the pre-emption to become effective on August 1, similar to many other legislative actions. Councilmember Wold stated that if cities are allowed to adopt stricter ordinances than state law provisions, tobacco lobbyists would have to lobby each community. Public Safety Director Gerdes stated that development of city -based ordinances further the discussion of the problem with business owners, members of school districts, and students. The discussion that takes place during the development of this local ordinance is as important as the ordinance itself. It forces people into the discussion and to be part of a local solution. Councilmember Lymangood stated that if the pre-emption clause remains in the bill, he would ask that legislators vote against it. He stated that he was 18 years old when his father died from a smoking-related illness, and he would like the opportunity to develop and enact an ordinance for Plymouth. OTHER LEGISLATIVE ISSUES Mayor Tierney stated that there have been different reports and recommendations on whether there is a surplus in state government and how it would be spent. Representative Abrams explained that the governor has proposed that $504 million be committed to a school cash flow account to accommodate short-term borrowing by school districts, as well as technology grants. Legislators shared their views on the options of a levy recognition shift buy-back or school cash flow account. Representative Van Dellen stated that he would prefer the cash flow option. He would not wish to spend any portion of it on new programs. It would take an affirmative action by the legislature in order not to do the recognition shift. Representative Leppik explained that her concern with the property tax levy recognition shift is that it is constantly moving. She stated that stability is important and there should be some really strong indications that the legislature is going to make changes in the property tax system that necessitate the buy -down. Mayor Tierney asked about speed limit legislation. Legislators reported that the governor has the authority to change the speed limit without legislative action. Representative Leppik stated the problem with the governor establishing limits is that the Dimler bill relating to changes in speed limit would still be in effect. The meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Laurie Ahrens City Clerk