HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-12-19 City Council Work Session PacketAgenda
City Council Work Session
City of Edina, Minnesota
City Hall Community Meeting Room
Tuesday, December 19, 2023
5:30 PM
I.Call To Order
II.Roll Call
III.2024 State and Federal Legislative Platforms
IV.Adjournment
The City of Edina wants all residents to be comfortable being part of the public
process. If you need assistance in the way of hearing ampli(cation, an
interpreter, large-print documents or something else, please call 952-927-8861
72 hours in advance of the meeting.
Date: December 19, 2023 Agenda Item #: III.
To:Mayor and City Council Item Type:
Reports / Recommendation
From:Gillian Straub, City Management Fellow
Item Activity:
Subject:2024 State and Federal Legislative Platforms Discussion, Information
CITY OF EDINA
4801 West 50th Street
Edina, MN 55424
www.edinamn.gov
ACTION REQUESTED:
None; action to approve the 2024 state legislative platform is requested at the December 19, 2023, City Council
meeting. Staff will seek approval of the 2024 federal legislative platform at a future City Council meeting.
INTRODUCTION:
Staff will present the City’s proposed state and federal platforms at the City Council’s December 19, 2023, work
session. Our goal for the Council at this meeting is to gain your approval of the two platforms so that we can
begin the process of communicating the platform to our state and national elected officials on your behalf.
The Council may wish to approve, amend or eliminate anything in the proposed platform. Our state platform will,
by reference, also adopt legislative platforms adopted by the League of MN Cities, Metro Cities and Municipal
Legislative League - unless specifically edited by a majority of the City Council.
The state legislative session will start this year on February 12, 2024. The City Council will meet in joint session
with our state legislative delegation on February 6, 2024. We will meet with our federally elected officials in
Washington DC during the National League of Cities’ Congressional Cities Conferences in early March.
ATTACHMENTS:
Description
2024 State Legislative Platform Summary
2024 State Legislative Platform
League of Minnesota Cities 2024 Legislative Platform
Metro Cities 2024 Legislative Platform
2024 Federal Legislative Platform Draft
Draft Summary of 2024 Legislative Priorities and Positions
December 19, 2023
Priorities:
1 Bonding for Interchange Improvements at Minnesota Highway 100 and Vernon Avenue/West 50th
Street
The City requests $5.3 million in state funds to make the TH100 and Vernon Avenue interchange safer and simpler and
increase pedestrian access. Hennepin County and the City are partnering on this project and $5.3 million in local
matching funds have been identified. The City also requests the surplus land created by the project be dedicated for a
third fire station in northeast Edina.
2 Bonding for the Aquatic Center
The Edina Aquatic Center requests state bonding to replace critical infrastructure in the facility’s pool pump house. Total
project cost is $10.5 million. The Aquatic Center is a popular regional destination, with 75% of its annual visitors coming
from outside of Edina, and an average of 850 to 1,000 visitors per day.
3 Sales Tax Exemption for Projects in the Braemar Park Master Plan and Fred Richards Park Master
Plan
The City will make improvements with local sales and use tax revenue in the Braemar Park Master Plan and Fred
Richards Park Master Plan and will seek a sales tax exemption for the construction costs.
4 Allowance to Use Allocated State Bonding for Fire Station 2 Construction Costs
The City received $1 million in state funds for the land acquisition, pre-design, or design of a new fire station in Edina.
This facility will have regional benefits through fire and ambulance service, emergency management, and public health
services. The City is requesting allowance to use the allocated funds for construction costs.
5 Authority to Redistribute the City’s Lodging Taxes
The City seeks legislative support for redistributing the City’s lodging taxes. The City seeks to increase the range of the
eligible expenses so that it includes general economic development and business support activities of the Edina Chamber
of Commerce and expenses related to local community festivals and events.
6 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Legislation for 70th and France and 72nd and France
The City requests an extension of the five-year rule to 10 years for these districts, and the ability to extend the terms of
each TIF agreement, subject to approval by Edina City Council. When these Districts were established, the developers
were on pace to redevelop the sites with new commercial and multi-family housing buildings. Increased costs of
construction material and labor and interest rates, along with limited private funding are projected to remain until 2025,
and these factor limit the ability of the projects to move forward.
Positions:
1 GENERAL GOVERNMENT
1.1 Realign Motor Vehicle Lease Sales Tax Allocation
Hennepin and Ramsey Counites contributions to the County State Aid Highway Fund for roads and bridges are allocated
to the other five metro counties, while all seven metro counties now collect their own local transportation sales tax. The
City advocates for distributing the sales tax on lease vehicles, per the county state aid formula, to all metro counties,
because it puts Hennepin and Ramsey Counties at a disadvantage in funding needed roads and bridge projects.
1.2 Increase Purchasing Agency
The city manager purchasing limit in statutory Plan B cities is $20,000; any purchase in excess of that requires approval by
the city council. The City supports a raise in the legal maximum to at least $100,000, with the ability for individual city
councils to set lower thresholds at their discretion because the current limit has not been raised since 2004, many city
purchases exceed $20,000 and neighboring cities have higher limits.
1.3 Change Group Home Regulation
The City supports regulation that requires distance separation for licensed residential care facilities because without this
regulation, individuals no longer reap the benefit of enjoying a normal residential setting with a diversity of households;
neighborhoods experience an increase in traffic, parking needs, and deliveries; grouping residential facilities is more
similar to a large institutional campus and commercial area, rather than a residential one.
1.4 Reinforce the Open Wholesaling Systems through Legislation
The City supports reinforcement of the open wholesaling system because without open wholesaling, wholesale prices will
increase, service levels on certain brands will decrease, purchase and delivery schedules will be reduced, and sale margins
will be compressed.
1.5 Oppose Changes to Tap Room Retail Operations
In October 2021, tap rooms began offering direct-to-customer bulk sales via carryout, with controls on quantity and
packaging. More time is needed to understand the effect on the market, customer, and other retailers.
1.6 Protect Customer Data
The City supports protections for customer data that may currently be subject to data practices requests because it
erodes trust with the customer, puts municipal liquor stores at a competitive disadvantage, and led to the discontinuation
of Edina’s municipal liquor customer rewards program.
1.7 Clarity on THC-Infused Products
As of July 2022, products containing THC are permitted for sale. The City seeks clarification on if retail liquor stores can
sell THC-infused beverages because profits generated may be considered unlawful activity and there are limits on
accepting credit card payments for the products.
1.8 Maintain Constraints on Off-Sale Liquor
Minnesota allows off-sale liquor for grocery stores which apply for the appropriate license, which some have done. Other
grocery and convenience stores sell the 3.2% alcohol allowed in stores without an off-sale liquor license. The City
supports maintaining the constraints on off-sale liquor because grocery stores can apply for the appropriate license and
the current licensing system allows smaller private and municipal liquor stores to compete.
1.9 Adult-Use Cannabis
Legislation during the 2023 session liberalized state law on adult-use cannabis and established regulatory authority in the
new Office of Cannabis management. The City supports further clarification on the opportunity to operate a municipal
cannabis retail store.
1.10 Hearing Aid Affordability
Hearing aid health care coverage and costs make these critical devices unattainable for those who are on a fixed income
and youth who age out of hearing aid support programs. The City supports programs or policy changes which reduce the
cost of hearing aids and increase access to them, due to the critical role they play and the cost which prohibits people
from accessing these devices.
1.11 Allow Restrictions on Possession of Firearms in Municipal Facilities with School-Like Use
The Minnesota Citizens Personal Protection Act, also known as “conceal-and carry,” prohibits guns on most school
properties but forbids other local units of government from prohibiting loaded firearms on their properties. The City has
several facilities with school-like usage and supports clarifying the law to allow municipal facilities with school-like usage
to restrict the possession of firearms inside their facilities.
1.12 Protect Municipal Employees with Enforcement Functions
The City supports extending the protections for municipal employees with mandated duties, such as police officers, to all
public employees whose jobs require them to enforce administrative codes, rules, ordinances, and state laws as a part of
their job due to risk of assault and violence these employees face.
1.13 Remove Language in the MN State Constitution Allowing for Enslavement of Incarcerated People
The City urges removal of language allowing for the enslavement of incarcerated people as it is inconsistent with
Minnesota values.
2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING
2.1 Reduce the Tax Rate on Land Trust Properties to Align with the 4d Property Tax Classification
The City supports a change to align land trust properties with the 4d property tax classification, which is applied to low-
income rental properties at up to a 0.25% rate because homeowners do not own the land, the trust is should create
affordable home ownership opportunities, which is difficult when the higher 1a tax rate makes the home less affordable.
2.2 Protection of and Taxation for Housing Purchased by Corporations for Renting
The City supports legislation authorizing a tax on the sale of these properties to corporations and protections prohibiting
the conversion of single family residences in to rental properties by developers and corporations The City and
surrounding communities have seen an increase in the number of residences converted from single family homes owned
by the residents to rental properties, and such conversion negatively impacts ownership opportunities for residents.
2.3 Reform Eviction Expungement
Records of unlawful detainer filings, or eviction lawsuits, remain on a tenant’s public record regardless of whether the
matter was settled or dismissed prior to the court hearing or if the tenant prevails at the hearing. These records are not
a reasonable predictor of future tenant behavior, yet they impede renters from securing housing in the future. Therefore,
the City supports legislation that would expand the eligibility for discretionary and mandatory expungements for eviction
case court files.
2.4 Authorize the City to Impose a Demolition Fee
The City requests the authority to impose a fee for single family, multifamily, and commercial properties that are
demolished, with the purpose of generating revenue to preserve and create affordable housing. The fee would be 2% of
the permit value; the current fee set to cover expenses associated with inspections is $1,500.
2.5 Authorize the City to Impose a Single-Family Transfer Tax
The City requests special legislation granting permission for the City to impose a 0.5% transfer tax on the sale of single-
family properties valued at more than $500,000, with the purpose of generating revenue to preserve and create
affordable housing.
3 ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY
3.1 Establish Building Performance Standards
The City supports establishing building performance standards because large commercial buildings are a significant
contributor to Minnesota’s and Edina’s greenhouse gas emissions and a standard establishes required energy efficiency
targets, a timeline to meet them, and resources to help building owners comply.
3.2 Establish a Right to Cooling Standard for Minnesotans
The City supports establishing a right to cooling, coupled with increased resources for the state’s Energy Assistance
Program (EAP) because lack of cooling or inadequate cooling can have serious health consequences.
3.3 Repeal the State’s Ban on Bag Bans
With the passage of Edina’s Carryout Bag Ordinance, the City took one step toward shifting consumer behavior away
from disposable goods. However, establishing a legislative path to ban plastic bags – produced by fossil fuels and source of
microplastics – is an essential next step to materially reduce waste.
3.4 Allocate I 00% of State Revenue from the Solid Waste Management Tax (SCORE) to County
Waste Management Activities
The City supports continued SCORE funding because the funds advance waste reduction, reuse, recycling and organics
programs to meet city, county and state recycling goals.
3.5 Support Efforts for the Proper Labeling of Compostable Products
The City supports promoting only vetted manufactures because it reduces the sale of products with misleading claims,
reduces recycling contamination and simplifies education.
3.6 Fund Expanded Infrastructure at the Local Level for the Creation of Compost Processing Sites
and Anaerobic Digesters.
The City supports additional funding for the programs because landfilling all waste in the county and metropolitan area is
no longer a viable option.
3.7 Support Extended Producer Responsibility
Extended producer responsibility initiatives require manufacturers to finance all costs associated with collection, reusing,
recycling, or safe disposal of their products such as carpets, mattresses, and electronics, which aligns with the City’s focus
on reuse events and building partnerships.
3.8 Develop and Fund Zero-Waste Initiatives
Zero-waste initiatives manage all discarded materials to their highest and best use. The City supports these initiatives
because they will aid state, county and city governments reaching recycling and composting goals.
3.9 Support Funding and Technical Assistance to Electrify Public and School Buses
There are very few electric public-school buses in Minnesota, and none in Edina. The City supports efforts to increase
electrification of public and school buses because it would reduce overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and the
impact of carbon emissions on populations that rely on this mode of transportation.
3.10 Increase Funding for the State E-bike Rebate Program
The City supports continuing and increasing the fund appropriated in 2023 for the new e-bike rebate program because
more low-income residents will be able to access e-bikes, which are associated with positive health and climate benefits.
3.11 Establish State Funding to Support Expanded Carshare Networks in the Twin Cities and
Minnesota
The City supports an expanded carshare network, following Xcel Energy pulling funding from HOURCAR, the nonprofit
electric carshare service in Minneapolis and Saint Paul.
3.12 Continue Support for Local Environmental Health Regulatory Programs
Currently, the State delegates authority to operate food, pool and lodging establishment regulatory programs to cities
and counties. The City supports continuing local operation of these public health services and programs, allowing cities to
provide services to meet local needs.
3.13 Support Funding Research, Training, and Legislation for Applicators of Chloride- Containing De-
Icing Chemicals
Salt is a pollutant and causes damage to infrastructure and the environment. Private contractors tend to over-apply salt
on parking lots and sidewalks, often because they are afraid of “slip-and-fall” lawsuits. Research, training and certification
is needed to decrease salt application, address liability concerns, and improve water quality.
3.14 Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) Municipal Grant Program
Inflow and infiltration (I/I) are terms for the ways that clean water, including ground and storm water, makes its way into
sanitary sewer pipes and gets treated, unnecessarily, at regional wastewater plants. I/I mitigation through the Municipal
State Bond Grant Program supports efficient use of the regional system for waste treatment and slows the the need for
capacity upgrades.
4 TRANSPORTATION
4.1 Continue Municipal State Aid (MSA) Funding
The City has 40.85 miles of roads designated as MSA. The City asks for continued support of this vital funding because
high-quality connections are necessary for the overall state highway network to work well, and the roads on the state aid
system typically carry heavier traffic volumes, connect major points of interest and provide an integrated and coordinated
road system.
4.2 Increase Local Bridge Replacement Program (LBRP) Funding
The Local Bridge Replacement Program provides local agencies transportation funding for the reconstruction,
rehabilitation or removal of bridges or structures, but the program does not receive enough funding, with $36 million in
waitlisted projects in 2019, including two Edina projects. The City supports funding dedicated to the Local Bridge
Replacement Program to meet local need.
4.3 Expansion of Public Transportation Frequency and Reach
The City supports additional funding to reverse the impact of recent service reductions, supports operator hiring
initiatives, and developing a connecting bus study for the METRO Green Line Extension (Southwest LRT) to increase
ridership to meet climate action goals and community goals.
4.4 Support Goals and Strategies to Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled
Transportation and land use account for 40% of Edina’s citywide greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and are likely to
become the leading GHG emissions source. The City supports funding to provide alternative transportation
infrastructure to decrease the use of single-occupancy vehicles to reduce their negative impacts on air quality, traffic
congestion and quality of life and to meet climate action goals.
5 PUBLIC SAFETY
5.1 Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Local Control
The City supports legislation allowing Local governments to set standards for EMS service in their communities and to find
an EMS provider than can meet local standards.
5.2 Residential Fire Sprinklers
The City opposes efforts to statutorily limit the use of residential fire sprinklers and supports the inclusion of
professionals and industry experts in the creating or writing of any code parameters.
5.3 Support Funding for Auto Theft and Violent Crime Investigation
The City supports the creation and funding of a multijurisdictional group of law enforcement officials focusing on
investigations and prevention due to the increase of auto theft and violent crimes committed in stolen vehicles.
5.4 Support Funding and Programming for Recruitment and Retention Needs
The City supports a variety of funded recruitment and retention programs for law enforcement agencies, including
bonuses, part-time officer licenses, paid health care in retirement, deferred retirement option programs and scholarship
programs. These programs will help address the difficult hiring and retention landscape that agencies of all sizes are facing.
5.5 Require K-12 Threat Assessments
The City supports legislation which would require school districts to study and address general and specific school safety
issues to address concerns beyond physical infrastructure, which has been addressed in other grant programs.
5.6 Increase Penalty for Fleeing in a Motor Vehicle and Allow Use of Mobile Tracking Devices
The City supports increasing the penalty for fleeing and allowing officers to use mobile tracking devices on fleeing vehicles
under specific circumstances. The number of fleeing offenders has risen, the risk of fleeing and pursuit is high, and
allowing the use of tracking devices reduces the need to pursue fleeing offenders.
5.7 Revise School Resource Officer Legislation
In 2023, the 93rd Legislature changed the reasonable force standards by which school resource officers act in schools.
The City supports amendments to the legislation to remove the competing interpretations and different reasonable force
standards.
5.8 Arbitration Reform
Currently, individual arbitrators are allowed to override the professional discipline and termination decisions made by
city manager and police chiefs. The City supports using administrative law judges and instituting a standard of
reasonableness focused on if the facts presented show that the employer’s actions were reasonable and consistent with
city and department policies, to restore the ability of local elected and appointed officials to make lasting discipline or
termination decisions and help ensure a public safety department meets the needs of the community.
December 19, 2023
Mayor and City Council
Scott H. Neal, City Manager
Gillian Straub, City Management Fellow
2024 State Legislative Platform
Information / Background:
This staff report provides the City’s state legislative platform, addressing issues that may be considered in
the 2024 state legislative session, beginning February 12, 2024. There are two types of items that make up
the 2024 legislative platform:
1. Priorities are issues specific to Edina and do not directly affect other communities. Priorities can
be found on pages 2-3.
2. Positions are issues affecting cities in general and are not specific to Edina. Positions can be found
on pages 4-16.
Legislative positions the City holds may be reflected in the Municipal Legislative Commission (MLC), Metro
Cities (Association of Metropolitan Municipalities), or the League of Minnesota Cities’ (LMC) 2024 legislative
platforms. In most cases, Edina’s interests align with these organizations both by virtue of the City’s
participation in each organization as well as their guiding purpose. Each association adopts a legislative
platform annually, and these platforms are attached to this report. This document does not duplicate items
found in the MLC, Metro Cities or LMC platforms, rather, adoption of the City’s legislative platform
assumes general alignment with these partner organizations.
STAFF REPORT Page 2
Priorities:
1 Bonding for Interchange Improvements at Minnesota Highway 100 and Vernon
Avenue/West 50th Street
The Minnesota Highway 100 interchange is non-standard with eight local road connections. The City
partnered with Hennepin County to improve this interchange, helping to reduce construction impacts and
cost. More importantly, the result will be a safer interchange for all users, by consolidating access points and
increasing pedestrian paths and creating a more connected Grandview district. The total project cost is
estimated to be $10.6 million; the City is requesting $5.3 million from the state, to match the local funds
allocated for the project. In addition, the City requests that the State designates the surplus land created by
the project for a much needed third fire station in northeast Edina.
2 Bonding for the Aquatic Center
The Edina Aquatic Center is requesting state bonding to replace critical infrastructure in the facility’s pool
pump house. Total cost for the project is $10.5 million. The pool house was originally constructed in 1958,
and it needs replacement to accommodate changes in state code related to pumping apparatus, filter
requirements and surge tank reservoirs to address swimmer capacity displacement. The Aquatic Center is a
popular regional destination, with 75% of its annual visitors coming from outside of Edina, and an average of
850 to 1,000 visitors per day. Bonding would provide for a modern, code-compliant pool house, along with
augmented pool amenities and patron areas to ensure a safe visitor experience.
3 Sales Tax Exemption for Projects in the Braemar Park Master Plan and Fred Richards
Park Master Plan
The City will use new local sales and use tax revenue to make improvements and expansions to Braemar
Arena and Braemar Park and Fred Richards Park, as outlined in the Braemar Park Master Plan and Fred
Richards Park Master Plan. The City will seek a sales tax exemption for the material and supplies purchased
for the construction, reconstruction, upgrade, expansion, or remodeling of City facilities included in the
Braemar Park Master Plan.
4 Allowance to Use Allocated State Bonding for Fire Station 2 Construction Costs
In 2022, the State Legislature approved $1 million in state bonding for the land acquisition, pre-design, or
design of a new fire station in Edina. This facility replaces the existing Fire Station 2 and will house the City’s
Public Health division. The new facility will provide a critical access point for public health services and
regional technical rescue responses, and it will better serve the growing needs of the community and region.
By the time the State allocated funds, the City had begun the final stages of design development and is now
preparing to move into construction. The City requests that the Legislature expand the use of funds to
include construction costs, as has been allowed with numerous other projects that received state bonding.
5 Authority to Redistribute the City’s Lodging Taxes
In 2014, the City established a lodging tax under Minnesota Statutes 469.190. The lodging tax is 3% and is
imposed on the gross receipts of businesses who furnish lodging services. By statute, the City retains 5% of
the gross monthly receipts of the tax to reimburse the City for the operational and overhead costs incurred
in collecting the tax. The balance of the monthly receipts is distributed pursuant to a separate agreement
STAFF REPORT Page 3
from 2014 to the Edina Chamber of Commerce to act as the City’s official Convention & Visitors Bureau
(CVB).
The lodging tax revenue has a limited range of eligible expenses, mostly related to marketing and tourism.
The City seeks to increase the range of the eligible expenses to include general economic development and
business support activities of the Edina Chamber of Commerce and expenses related to local community
festivals and events. This includes fireworks for the 4th of July, law enforcement services for two art fairs
and event expenses for the annual Torchlight Night.
The City seeks legislative support for a redistribution of the City’s lodging taxes, collected under M.S.
469.190. Additionally, all existing fund balances held by the Chamber of Commerce currently restricted by
the spending limitations of M.S. 469.190 would be released from those spending limitations and would be
eligible to spend on general economic development and business support activities as allowed under the new
law.
6 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) Legislation for 70th and France and 72nd and France
The City approved the 70th and France and 72nd and France 2 TIF Districts in 2022 and 2023 respectively
to encourage reinvestment and redevelopment of substandard commercial properties. After considerable
discussion, the City also entered into TIF redevelopment agreements with each development team to
provide TIF funding subject to project completion and delivery of proposed public benefits.
The City requests an extension of the five-year rule to 10 years. In addition, the City requests the ability to
extend the terms of each TIF agreement, subject to approval by Edina City Council.
When these Districts were established, the developers were on pace to redevelop the sites with new
commercial and multi-family housing buildings and the existing buildings were demolished. Since the Districts
were established and the substandard buildings removed, the national economic climate has changed
significantly. Costs of construction material and labor have increased. Interest rates have increased. The
ability of private banks to finance office buildings has decreased. The availability of private equity has also
decreased. This situation is forecasted to remain the same for most of 2024 and is currently anticipated to
recover in 2025.
This pause in private financing sources hinders the ability of both projects to move forward. The ‘five-year
rule’ in Minnesota TIF statutes will likely disqualify these sites from the use of TIF. Without the pledge of TIF
to fill the financial gap, neither of these projects will move forward.
The City requests an extension of the five-year rule to 10 years to allow the private lending sector to return
to normal. In addition, the City requests the ability to extend the terms of each TIF agreement, subject to
approval by Edina City Council. This would increase the 15-year term of the 70th and France District to 25
years and the 25-year term of the 72nd and France 2 District to 30 years.
STAFF REPORT Page 4
Positions:
The following legislative positions are grouped into five categories: General Government (page 4-8),
Affordable Housing (8-9), Environment and Sustainability (9-12), Transportation (12-13) and Public Safety
(13-15). These positions represent issues which apply to Edina and other Minnesota cities.
1 GENERAL GOVERNMENT
1.1 Realign Motor Vehicle Lease Sales Tax Allocation
In 2015, state legislation reallocated $32 million of the sales tax collected from leased vehicles from the
State's general fund, half to Greater Minnesota and half to metro counties through the County State Aid
Highway Fund. To balance funding for transit and roads/bridges, the new law excluded Hennepin and
Ramsey Counties from receiving their share of funding. Instead, the other five metro counties split the
proceeds generated in Hennepin and Ramsey Counties.
With the elimination of the Counties Transit Improvement Board (CTIB) in 2017, all seven metro counties
now collect their own local transportation sale tax, but the exemption still blocks Hennepin and Ramsey
Counties. The City of Edina advocates for returning to the original intent by eliminating the exemption of
Hennepin and Ramsey Counties and distributing the sales tax on lease vehicles, per the county state aid
formula, to all metro counties. The City supports re-aligning the distribution because:
• Distributing Hennepin and Ramsey County proceeds to the other five metro counties puts cities in
Hennepin County at a disadvantage when it comes to accessing county funds for road and bridge
projects.
• This change would provide an estimated $10.7 million in additional funding to Hennepin County for
roads and bridges.
1.2 Increase Purchasing Agency
The city manager is the chief purchasing agent of statutory Plan B cities. State law requires the city manager
to recommend purchases and contracts over $20,000 and requires additional approval by the city council.
This approval is obtained through requests for approval on the consent agenda. The City supports a raise in
the legal maximum to at least $100,000, with the ability for individual city councils to set lower thresholds at
their discretion because:
• The $20,000 threshold has not been raised since 2004. This does not account for standard inflation
over the past 19 years.
• Most city purchases exceed $20,000. Allowing the city manager a higher purchasing threshold makes
purchasing more efficient, while maintaining compliance and oversight of budget.
• Neighboring charter cities with the council-manager form of government have significantly higher
limits, including St. Louis Park at $175,000, and Bloomington and Richfield have city manager
purchasing authority in excess of $20,000.
1.3 Change Group Home Regulation
Licensed residential facilities do not have any distance separation requirements in single-family residential
use zones in Edina. Minn. Stat. 245A.11 has distance requirements of 1,320 feet between licensed residential
STAFF REPORT Page 5
facilities, but these requirements do not apply to Edina. The City supports regulation that requires this
distance separation because:
• Grouping facilities on the same block in a single-family residential neighborhood is detrimental to the
neighborhood and the individuals in the facilities.
• Individuals no longer reap the benefit of enjoying a normal residential setting with a diversity of
households. When entire blocks are acquired for licensed residential facilities, the setting is more
similar to a large institutional campus.
• Neighborhoods experience an increase in traffic, parking needs, deliveries, and other activities
compounded by numerous facilities on the same block.
• Grouping facilities effectively turns a residential area into a commercial area.
Municipal Liquor
Positions 1.4-1.9 relate to municipal liquor. The City has operated a municipal liquor store since it was
established by local referendum in 1948. The liquor operation generates over $1 million annually in profit.
These profits fund Edina’s recreational facilities, including the ice arena, art center and aquatic center,
allowing the City to reduce user fees and allow greater access. The City’s recreation programs serve
children and families from all over the metro area, not just Edina. Continual support of liquor stores and
their ability to generate profit allows municipal liquor stores to benefit the community and region through
local programs and amenities.
1.4 Reinforce the Open Wholesaling Systems through Legislation
In 2021, Miami-based Southern Glazer's Wine and Spirits filed a lawsuit against the State of Minnesota
seeking elimination of a Minnesota law called the Coleman Act, which contains the open wholesaling system
of spirits distribution. Open wholesaling of spirits requires that all spirit brands (with some exceptions) be
available for sale to all licensed Minnesota wholesalers. This encourages healthy competition among
wholesalers benefiting both sellers and customers. If Southern Glazer's lawsuit is successful, more than half
of the spirit brands in Minnesota may become exclusive with Southern Glazer's. The City opposes this
lawsuit and supports an amendment of the Coleman Act to reinforce a system of open wholesaling because
without protections for open wholesaling:
• Wholesale prices will increase.
• Service levels on certain brands will decrease.
• Purchase and delivery schedules will be reduced.
• Sale margins will be compressed.
1.5 Oppose Changes to Tap Room Retail Operations
Due to changes during the COVID-19 pandemic, tap rooms can offer direct-to-customer bulk sales via
carryout. These sales are controlled by quantity, and the product must use different packaging than the
product supplied wholesale to liquor stores. The City opposes changes to tap room retail operations
because:
• The changes allowing retail operations were implemented in October 2021. More time is needed to
understand their effect on the market, customer, and other retailers.
• Changes could allow bulk or exclusive sale from tap rooms.
STAFF REPORT Page 6
1.6 Protect Customer Data
As a municipal operation, municipal liquor stores may be subject to data practices requests. The City
supports protections for customer data because:
• Customer data subject to request could include purchase history and personally identifying
information.
• The threat of data requests erodes trust with the customer.
• It may put municipal liquor stores at a competitive disadvantage.
• The City’s municipal liquor operation discontinued its customer rewards program, because without
clarity of what information is subject to a data request, the City would not hold personally
identifying information and purchase history that could be subject to a data request.
1.7 Clarity on THC-Infused Products
With the passage of Minn. Stat. 151.72 in July 2022, products containing THC are permitted for sale. The
City seeks clarification on if retail liquor stores can sell THC-infused beverages because:
• Without federal passage of the SAFE banking act, cannabis-related legitimate operations cannot
generate proceeds from unlawful activity, and banking institutions can be penalized by federal
authorities for providing services to a cannabis-related business.
• Current regulation allows for retailers like Edina Liquor to accept credit card payments only if the
percent of total revenue from THC products is less than 15%.
1.8 Maintain Constraints on Off-Sale Liquor
Currently, grocery and convenience stores can sell 3.2% alcohol, while all other alcohol products are sold at
liquor stores. Some grocery stores opt to apply for an off-sale liquor license and can sell beer, wine and
liquor at the store, with some adjustments, including a separate entrance. The City of Edina supports
maintaining the constraints on off-sale liquor because:
• The constraints allow for smaller private and municipal liquor stores to compete on an even playing
field.
• Claims that the off-sale liquor license process inhibits growth are rebutted by several grocery stores
opting for some locations applying for the off-sale liquor license.
1.9 Adult-Use Cannabis
Legislation during the 2023 session liberalized state law on adult-use cannabis and established regulatory
authority in the new Office of Cannabis management. The City supports further clarification on the
opportunity to operate a municipal cannabis retail store because:
• Local governments should have the option to establish municipal dispensaries in the model of
municipal retail liquors stores, as both operations have primary goals of ensuring the safety and
security of the community.
1.10 Hearing Aid Affordability
Currently, hearing aids are not classified as durable medical equipment (DME) and therefore not covered
under many health insurance plans. Without health insurance coverage, many who need hearing aids are
unable to get them, as they cost three to six thousand dollars. The City supports programs or policy
changes reducing the cost of hearing aids and increasing access to them because:
STAFF REPORT Page 7
• Hearing aids are critical devices for those who are deaf or hard of hearing.
• Without health insurance coverage, hearing aids are not affordable for those living on a fixed
income. Both Edina seniors on a fixed income and youth who age out of hearing aid support cannot
access hearing aids because of cost.
• Cochlear implants, which cost $80,000 to $120,000, are typically covered by health insurance while
hearing aids are not.
1.11 Allow Restrictions on Possession of Firearms in Municipal Facilities with School-Like
Use
The Minnesota Citizens Personal Protection Act, also known as “conceal-and carry,” prohibits guns on most
school properties but forbids other local units of government from prohibiting loaded firearms on their
properties. The inconsistencies in the law’s treatment of different kinds of properties have caused confusion
about how the law applies to multi-use facilities, such as municipal ice arenas used for school-sponsored
programs. While various public facilities can restrict firearm possession, including schools, public facilities
with a school-like function are not granted this authority. The City has several facilities with school-like
usage and a large population of school-aged users. The City supports clarifying the law to allow municipal
facilities with school-like usage to restrict the possession of firearms inside their facilities because:
• This would align the law with other facilities that are authorized to restrict possession.
• This would be one step to securing the safety of those who use City facilities for a school-like
function.
1.12 Protect Municipal Employees with Enforcement Functions
Many city employees and contractors are required to enforce administrative codes, rules, ordinances, and
state laws as part of their job duties. Minnesota law recognizes the need to protect certain employees
whose jobs make it more likely they will be the target of assaults by escalating assault charges from fifth to
fourth degree for the assaults of peace officers, firefighters, school officials, and “public employees with
mandated duties.” However, employees such as code enforcement officials, utility operators, municipal
liquor store clerks and others have similar enforcement functions. The City supports extending the existing
protection to all public employees whose jobs require them to enforce administrative codes, rules,
ordinances, and state laws as a part of their job because:
• Due to the enforcement function of their jobs, these public employees can be subject to verbal
assaults, threats, and physical violence.
• This would more evenly apply the law to all employees more likely to become target of assaults.
1.13 Remove Language in the State Constitution Allowing for Enslavement of Incarcerated
People
The Minnesota Constitution states that “There shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude in the state
otherwise than as punishment for a crime of which the party has been convicted.” The City urges removal
of this language because:
• This is immoral and out of step with Minnesota values. As a public entity, it’s incumbent on public
officials to hold the state accountable to remove this language and its consequences.
STAFF REPORT Page 8
• There is recent precedent for such an action, with Colorado, Nebraska, Utah, Alabama, Oregon,
Tennessee, and Vermont striking similar language from their constitutions.
2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Affordable housing includes three focuses: regulatory tools for affordable housing (2.1, 2.2), protecting low-
and moderate-income tenants (2.3), new funding sources for affordable housing (2.4, 2.5)
2.1 Reduce the Tax Rate on Land Trust Properties to Align with the 4d Property Tax
Classification
Previous legislative sessions made changes to the tax classification of Community Land Trust properties by
reducing the tax rate for the 1a – Residential Homestead classification, from an up to 1.25% rate to 0.75%.
The City supports a change to align with the 4d property tax classification, which is applied to low-income
rental properties at up to a 0.25% rate because:
• Homeowners lease, and do not own, the land from the Land Trust.
• The property is required to be affordable as memorialized through the ground lease.
• The Land Trust is designed to create affordable home ownership opportunities, but requiring the
homeowner to pay property taxes on the value of the house and the land at the single-family
homestead rate makes homes less affordable.
• Due to both leasing the land and the requirement that it stay affordable, 4d is a more appropriate
tax classification than 1a.
• Edina has 26 land trust residential properties, with property values in the city rapidly increasing.
High property values and corresponding taxes impact the ability of land trust homeowners to
remain in their home.
2.2 Protection of and Taxation for Housing Purchased by Corporations for Renting
The City supports legislation that authorizes a tax on the sale of these properties to corporations and
protections prohibiting the conversion of single-family residences into rental properties by developers and
corporations. The City supports bills introduced in the 92nd legislature: SF 3147, imposing the tax, and SF
4313, prohibiting the conversion, because:
• The City and surrounding communities have seen an increase in the number of residences
converted from single family homes owned by the residents to rental properties.
• Such conversion negatively impacts ownership opportunities for residents.
2.3 Reform Eviction Expungement
Records of unlawful detainer filings, or eviction lawsuits, remain on a tenant’s public record regardless of
whether the matter was settled or dismissed prior to the court hearing or if the tenant prevails at the
hearing. The City supports legislation expanding the eligibility for discretionary and mandatory
expungements for eviction case court files because:
• In these cases, the eviction record is not a reasonable predictor of future tenant behavior and
should be expunged.
• The existence of this record impedes the ability of the renter to secure suitable rental housing in
the future.
STAFF REPORT Page 9
2.4 Authorize the City to Impose a Demolition Fee
Currently, the City charges and collects a small permit fee for demolitions. These funds legally must be used
to pay for the service provided in building inspections and permitting. The City requests the authority to
impose a fee for single family, multifamily, and commercial properties that are demolished, with the purpose
of generating revenue to preserve and create affordable housing in the community. The proposed rate is 2%
of the permit value for single-family, multi-family, and commercial properties. The current permit fee for
demolitions is $1,500. Similar fees, which target demolitions and generate funds for affordable housing, have
been imposed in Lake Forest, Evanston, and Highland Park, IL. All funds would be allocated for the
Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The City supports this because:
• Demolition results in the loss of homes that tend to cost less than the homes that replace them. If
this is a regular occurrence, this can result in the loss of naturally occurring affordable housing and
price out lower- and middle-income households.
• The revenue generated from these fees will be used to replace affordable housing in the community.
• The Affordable Housing Trust Fund can only be used to preserve and create affordable housing. The
City has several successful programs funded by the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, including the
Affordable Ownership Preservation Program, which has preserved or built 14 affordable, ownership
homes in three years and the housing rehabilitation program, providing loans to over 40 Edina
income-eligible households.
2.5 Authorize the City to Impose a Single-Family Transfer Tax
The City requests special legislation granting permission for the City to impose a 0.5% transfer tax on the
sale of single-family properties valued at more than $500,000. The City would request reasonable
exceptions, including transfers to non-profit entities, Community Land Trusts, transactions to change a
name, and others. All funds would be allocated for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. This tax is widely
used in places such as Los Angeles, Washington DC, Connecticut, Hawaii, New Jersey, Vermont,
Washington State, and Illinois. The City supports this because:
• Affordable Housing Trust Fund can only be used to preserve and create affordable housing. The City
has several successful programs funded by the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, including the
Affordable Ownership Preservation Program, which has preserved or built 14 affordable, ownership
homes in three years.
• Edina has lost over 1,000 moderately priced homes in the last 10 years. The transfer tax helps to
capture some of the value in the higher priced homes to preserve and create moderately-priced
homes.
3 ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY
Environment and sustainability has five thematic focuses: energy management and environment (3.1, 3.2, 3.3),
right to repair (3.4, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8), sustainable transportation (3.10, 3.11, 3.12), local environmental public
health programs (3.12) and water resource management (3.13, 3.14)
3.1 Establish Building Performance Standards
Large commercial buildings are a significant contributor to Minnesota’s and Edina’s greenhouse gas
emissions. Building energy benchmarking is already in use, requiring building owners to report energy use.
However, the City supports establishing building performance standards because a performance standard:
STAFF REPORT Page 10
• Establishes required energy efficiency targets, a timeline to meet them, and resources to help
building owners comply.
3.2 Establish a Right to Cooling Standard for Minnesotans
In 2023, the Legislature passed a right to heating law for renters, to ensure renters have safe and functional
homes. A lack of heating or inadequate heating can have serious health consequences. The City supports
establishing a similar right to cooling, coupled with increased resources for the state’s Energy Assistance
Program (EAP) that provides utility bill relief and weatherization programs like the Sustainable Resource
Center to accept applications year-round and without a cap on annual service recipients. The City supports
this because:
• Minnesota is warming rapidly.
• Excessive heat has well-documented health consequences, including serious illness and death.
• Renters require additional protections to ensure landlords provide a safe and functional home.
3.3 Repeal the State’s Ban on Bag Bans
With the passage of Edina’s Carryout Bag Ordinance, the City took one step toward shifting consumer
behavior away from disposable goods. However, establishing a legislative path to ban plastic bags – produced
by fossil fuels and source of microplastics – is an essential next step to materially reduce waste.
3.4 Allocate I 00% of State Revenue from the Solid Waste Management Tax (SCORE) to
County Waste Management Activities
Currently, the City is awarded a portion of the SCORE funds annually for residential recycling, residential
organics recycling and participation in both at the multi-family building level. The City strives to spend 100%
of the funds on allowable purposes. The City supports continued SCORE funding because:
• The funds advance waste reduction, reuse, recycling and organics programs to meet city, county and
state recycling goals.
• SCORE funding allows the City to conduct critical outreach.
3.5 Support Efforts for the Proper Labeling of Compostable Products
The City supports promoting only vetted manufactures because:
• Working with only vetted manufactures reduces the likelihood of products with misleading claims to
be sold or distributed in Minnesota.
• It reduces City contamination in the recycling process.
• It simplifies education on which certifications customers can look for.
3.6 Fund Expanded Infrastructure at the Local Level for the Creation of Compost
Processing Sites and Anaerobic Digesters
The City supports additional funding for counties creating compost processing sites and anaerobic digesters
because:
• Landfilling all waste in Hennepin County and metropolitan area is no longer a viable option.
• Compost processing sites and anaerobic digesters provide more options for waste haulers.
STAFF REPORT Page 11
3.7 Support Extended Producer Responsibility
Extended producer responsibility initiatives require manufacturers to finance all costs associated with
collection, reusing, recycling, or safe disposal of their products such as carpets, mattresses, and electronics.
The City supports this and similar efforts because:
• The goals align with the City’s focus on reuse events and building partnerships.
3.8 Develop and Fund-Zero Waste Initiatives
Zero-waste initiatives manage all discarded materials to their highest and best use according to the waste
management hierarchy set forth in the Waste Management Act. The City supports the development of zero-
waste initiatives because:
• They will aid local governments reaching recycling and composting goals.
• The City’s waste reduction goals mirror those set by the state, county and Edina’s climate action
plans.
3.9 Support Funding and Technical Assistance to Electrify Public and School Buses
Currently, less than one percent of Metro Transit’s fleet of buses run solely on electric power; 11% are
hybrid-electric buses. There are very few electric public-school buses in Minnesota, and none in Edina. The
City supports efforts to increase electrification of public and school buses because:
• It would support transportation equity and reduce overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
• Carbon emissions from traditional diesel buses disproportionally impact populations that rely on
this mode of transportation, including children, elders, low-income households and BIPOC
communities.
3.10 Increase Funding for the State E-bike Rebate Program
In 2023, the State appropriated $2 million for a new e-bike rebate program. Expecting that eligible
participants will each receive an average of $1,000, this is only 2,000 new e-bikes on the road. The City
supports continuing and increasing this fund because:
• More low-income residents will be able to access new and climate friendly transportation.
• E-bikes are associated with positive health benefits.
3.11 Establish State Funding to Support Expanded Carshare Networks in the Twin Cities
and Minnesota
Xcel Energy recently pulled private funding from HOURCAR, the nonprofit electric carshare service in
Minneapolis and Saint Paul. The City supports an expanded network and has studied resident support via a
partnership with the University of Minnesota’s Resilient Communities Project in 2022-23. The City supports
this because:
• Carshares are a viable alternative to owning a personal vehicle.
• Carshares have a demonstrated history of reducing vehicle miles traveled.
STAFF REPORT Page 12
3.12 Continue Support for Local Environmental Health Regulatory Programs
Currently, the State delegates authority to operate food, pool and lodging establishment regulatory
programs to cities and counties. The City supports continuing local operation of these public health services
and programs, because:
• It allows cities to provide services to meet local needs.
3.13 Support Funding Research, Training, and Legislation for Applicators of Chloride-
Containing De-icing Chemicals
Salt is a pollutant and causes damage to infrastructure and the environment. Private contractors tend to
over-apply salt on parking lots and sidewalks, often because they are afraid of “slip-and-fall” lawsuits. The
City supports state funding for research and training for public and private applicators of chloride-containing
de-icing chemicals, and legislation to address liability concerns of private de-icing salt applicators because:
• Waterbodies throughout the state, including within and downstream of Edina, fail to meet the water
quality standards for chloride (salt) established by the state and so have been added to the federal
register of impaired waters as required by the Clean Water Act.
• The proposed legislation, which is modeled on similar laws passed in New Hampshire and Illinois,
would provide liability exemption for contractors who attend training, get certified, and document
their practices, reducing the over-application of salt.
3.14 Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) Municipal Grant Program
Inflow and infiltration (I/I) describe for the ways that clean water, including ground and storm water, makes
its way into sanitary sewer pipes and gets treated, unnecessarily, at regional wastewater plants. The
Metropolitan Council identifies cities contributing excessive 1/1 into the regional wastewater system and
charges the city for the excess. The City supports state financial assistance to cities for metro area 1/1
mitigation, such as the Municipal State Bond Grant Program because:
• I/I mitigation supports efficient use of the regional system for waste treatment.
• I/I mitigation slows the need for capacity upgrades.
4 TRANSPORTATION
4.1 Continue Municipal State Aid (MSA) Funding
The City has 40.85 miles of roads designated as MSA. This state funding is vital to maintain these high-quality
connections. The City asks for continued support of municipal state aid funding because:
• The state aid road system was developed to provide vital, high-quality connections necessary for the
overall state highway network to work well.
• The roads that are on the state aid system typically carry heavier traffic volumes, connect major
points of interest and provide an integrated and coordinated road system.
4.2 Increase Local Bridge Replacement Program (LBRP) Funding
The Local Bridge Replacement Program provides local agencies funding for the reconstruction, rehabilitation
or removal of bridges or structures. The program is financed by the passage of specific legislation allocating
general obligation state bond funds, but regularly does not receive enough funding. The City supports
funding dedicated to the Local Bridge Replacement Program to provide safe bridges because:
STAFF REPORT Page 13
• In 2019, there was $36 million in waitlisted, unfunded bridge projects.
• The City had two projects which previously qualified for funding but were waitlisted: the Minnehaha
Creek and Wooddale Avenue bridge.
• The City has 27 local bridges.
4.3 Expansion of Public Transportation Frequency and Reach
Edina, like much of the Metro area, has experienced multiple reductions in transit service frequency and
reach as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and workforce shortages. The City supports additional funding
to reverse the impact of recent service reductions, support operator hiring initiatives, and develop a
connecting bus study for the METRO Green Line Extension (Southwest LRT) because:
• The City’s transit ridership prior to the pandemic was about half the average rate of Hennepin
County.
• To reach its climate action goals, the City aims to double public transit ridership from 3% in 2019,
to 7% by 2030. Adequate public transit offerings are essential to meeting the City’s climate action
goals.
• Transit service supports many community goals, including improving mobility, relieving traffic
congestion, reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and promoting sustainable development and
growth.
4.4 Support Tools and Strategies to Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled
In Edina, the transportation and land use sectors account for around 40% of citywide greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions and are projected to become the leading GHG emissions source in Edina as the electricity sector
moves to more renewable energy sources. The City supports funding to provide alternative transportation
infrastructure to decrease the use of single-occupancy vehicles and their associated negative impacts on air
quality, traffic congestion and quality of life because:
• Total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in Edina in 2021 was more than 500 million miles, an increase
from past years.
• The City’s Climate Action Plan identified a goal to reduce VMT by seven percent by 2030.
• Decreasing commuters driving alone by six percent to match the county-wide average would
decrease VMT by up to 10 million miles.
5 PUBLIC SAFETY
5.1 Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Local Control
In February 2022, the Office of the Legislative Auditor (OLA) released a report that found serious
deficiencies with both the management of the Emergency Medical Service Regulatory Board and the current
ambulance service license process. During the 2023 legislative session, the Minnesota Fire Association
Coalition introduced legislation, HF2736 and SF2691, to implement the recommendations of the OLA
relating to the primary service areas. The City supports this legislation because:
• Local governments should be able to set standards for EMS service in their communities.
• Local governments should have the authority to find an EMS provider than can meet local standards.
STAFF REPORT Page 14
5.2 Residential Fire Sprinklers
There are few statutory requirements for residential fire sprinklers. The City opposes efforts to statutorily
limit the use of residential fire sprinklers and supports the inclusion of professionals and industry experts in
the creating or writing of any code parameters, particularly the installation of fire suppression systems in
residential building code, because:
• Sprinklers protect occupants, firefighters and property from fires.
• Recent Minnesota studies show the cost of installing residential fire sprinkler systems averages $1.15
per sprinklered square foot, or approximately one percent of new home construction.
5.3 Support Funding for Auto Theft and Violent Crime Investigation
The City supports the creation and funding of a multijurisdictional group of law enforcement officials
focusing on investigations and prevention because:
• Auto theft and violent crimes committed in stolen vehicles have dramatically increased.
5.4 Support Funding and Programming for Recruitment and Retention Needs
The City supports a variety of funded recruitment and retention programs for law enforcement agencies.
Programs include creating a grant program for bonuses, renewing part-time officer licenses for small
agencies, paid health care for licensed police officers who retire at 55 after 10 consecutive years of service
with a Minnesota city, deferred retirement option programs, county or tribal government and scholarship
programs with higher education partners. The City supports these funded programs because:
• Agencies of all sizes are having trouble recruiting and retaining officers.
• Out-of-state agencies are recruiting Minnesota officers away from the state.
• Deferred retirement option programs in particular would help stabilize the workforce.
5.5 Require K-12 Threat Assessments
The City supports legislation which would require school districts to study and address general and specific
school safety issues because:
• Previous funding, including the grants passed by the Legislature in 2018, only provided for
infrastructure improvements.
• Further assessment of school safety issues, beyond physical infrastructure, is needed.
5.6 Increase Penalty for Fleeing in a Motor Vehicle and Allow Use of Mobile Tracking
Devices
Currently, the penalty for an offender fleeing is relatively low and using tracking devices on stolen vehicles is
only allowed with owner consent or a search warrant. The City supports increasing the penalty for fleeing
and allowing officers to use mobile tracking devices on fleeing vehicles under specific circumstances. The
City supports this because:
• The number of offenders who flee police officers has increased as police departments shift away
from pursuing due to the high level of risk to the community. It is well known that police will often
not pursue, due to the risk.
• Increasing the penalty more appropriately captures the risk to the community when an offender
flees.
STAFF REPORT Page 15
• Allowing officers to use mobile tracking devices when an officer has reason to believe a vehicle is
stolen or the driver has committed a crime reduces the need to pursue many offenders, allowing for
both safer streets and the ability to safely locate offenders.
5.7 Revise School Resource Officer Legislation
In 2023, the 93rd Legislature changed the reasonable force standards by which school resource officers act
in schools. The City supports the following amendments to legislation:
Minnesota Statute 121A.582, Subd. 1(b):
Subd. 1 (b) expand the definition of when “reasonable force” may be used by amending the language as
follows: “to restrain a student and or prevent bodily harm or death to the student or another.”
Subd. 1 (b) clarify that use of reasonable force by a school resource officer or police officer contracted with
a district is regulated by Minnesota Statute 609.06.
Minnesota Statute 121A.58:
Subd. 2 (a) AND Subd. 2 (b): Remove “school resource officer” and “police officer contracted with the
district” from roles covered by this subdivision. Add a section that makes the exclusion of “school resource
officers” and “police officers contracted with a district” from the definition of “agents” or “employees” of a
school district explicit.
The City supports these amendments because:
• The current legislation has competing interpretations, some allowing for restraint and some banning
it except in the most extreme cases, and potentially creating different reasonable force standards for
school resource officers and police officers.
• School resource officer programs can benefit students, officers, and communities through positive
interactions. The current legal confusion caused many partnerships between schools and police
departments to be put on pause, absent clear direction.
5.8 Arbitration Reform
In the current system of police arbitration under the Minnesota Public Employment Labor Relations Act
(MPELRA), individual arbitrators are allowed to override the professional discipline and termination
decisions made by city manager and police chiefs. City managers and police chiefs make these decisions to
ensure professional, safe and effective policing. Ultimately, arbitrators can, in their sole judgement, require a
city to return an officer to the streets, when the city has determined the officers is not meeting the
standards required of the department and community, without an appeals process for the city.
The City supports using administrative law judges and instituting a standard of reasonableness focused on if
the facts presented show that the employer’s actions were reasonable and consistent with city and
department policies. The City supports these positions because:
• The current system undermines the ability of elected and appointed officials, including police chiefs,
to make lasting discipline or termination decisions.
• These decisions help ensure a public safety department meets the needs of the community, which it
cannot do under the current system of police arbitration.
STAFF REPORT Page 16
Recommended Action:
Staff recommends adopting the legislative platform.
STAFF REPORT Page 17
2023 Legislative Summary
Priorities
Sales Tax Exemption for the Community Health and Safety Center (Fire Station 2)
The City was granted a tax exemption for the construction of Fire Station 2. That action will save the City
over $900,000 for the project.
Bonding for Community Health and Safety Center (Fire Station 2)
The City received $1.3 million in state bonding for Fire Station 2.
Bonding for the South Metro Public Safety Training Facility
The City received $1 million in state bonding for the Facility.
Bonding for the Pedestrian Bridge over Highway 62
The City received $3 million in state bonding for the Pedestrian Bridge over Highway 62.
Positions
Repeal Statutory Salary Limitation on City Employees
Establish Revenue Resource for Affordable Housing
Funding of Fire Resources, Training and Statewide Response Teams
Increase Funding for Public Safety Disability Requirements
Focus on Mental Health and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) Support for Law
Enforcement Officers and Firefighters
STAFF REPORT Page 18
City of Edina Staff Contact Information
Priorities
Scott Neal, City Manager, can be contacted regarding any of the legislative priorities, in addition to the staff
below. He can be reached at SNeal@EdinaMN.gov or 952-826-0401.
1 Bonding for Interchange Improvements at Minnesota
Highway 100 and Vernon Avenue/West 50th Street
Chad Millner, Director of
Engineering
CMillner@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0318
2 Bonding for Aquatic Center Perry Vetter, Parks & Recreation
Director
PVetter@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0430
3 Sales Tax Exemption for Projects in the Braemar Park
Master Plan and Fred Richards Park Master Plan
Perry Vetter, Parks & Recreation
Director
PVetter@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0430
4 Allowance to Use Allocated State Bonding for Fire
Station 2 Construction Costs
Andrew Slama, Fire Chief
ASlama@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0332
5 Authority to Redistribute the City’s Lodging Taxes Scott Neal, City Manager
SNeal@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0401
6 Tax Increment Financing (TIF) legislation for 70th and
France and 72nd and France
Bill Neuendorf, Economic
Development Manager
BNeuendorf@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0407
STAFF REPORT Page 19
Positions
1 GENERAL GOVERNMENT
1.1 Re-align Motor Vehicle Lease Sales Tax Allocation Scott Neal, City Manager
SNeal@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0401
1.2 Increase Purchasing Authority
1.3 Change Group Home Regulation Cary Teague, Community
Development Director
CTeague@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0460
1.4 Reinforce the Open Wholesaling Systems through
Legislation Josh Furbish, Liquor Operations
General Manager
JFurbish@EdinaMN.gov
952-903-5732
1.5 Oppose Changes to Tap Rooms Retail Operations
1.6 Protect Customer Data
1.7 Clarity on THC-Infused Products
1.8 Maintain Constraints on Off-Sale Liquor
1.9 Adult-Use Cannabis
1.10 Hearing Aid Affordability Scott Neal, City Manager
SNeal@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0401
1.11 Allow Restrictions on Possession of Firearms in
Municipal Facilities with School-Like Use
1.12 Protect Municipal Employees with Enforcement
Functions
1.13 Remove Language in the Minnesota State Constitution
Allowing for Enslavement of Incarcerated People
2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING
2.1 Apply the 4d Property Tax Classification to
Community Land Trust Properties
Stephanie Hawkinson, Affordable
Housing Development Manager
SHawkinson@EdinaMN.gov
952-833-9578
2.2 Protection of and Taxation for Housing Purchased by
Corporations for Renting
2.3 Reform Eviction Expungement
2.4 Authorize the City to Impose a Demolition Fee
2.5 Authorize the City to Impose a Single-Family Home
Transfer Tax
STAFF REPORT Page 20
3 ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY
3.1 Establish Building Performance Standards Chad Millner, Director of
Engineering
CMillner@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0318
3.2 Establish a Right to Cooling Standard for Minnesotans
3.3 Repeal the State’s Ban on Bag Bans
3.4 Allocate I 00% of State Revenue from the Solid Waste
Management Tax (SCORE) to County Waste
Management Activities
Twila Singh, Organics Recycling
Coordinator
TSingh@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-1657
3.5 Support Efforts for the Proper Labeling of
Compostable Products
3.6 Fund Expanded Infrastructure at the Local Level for
the Creation of Compost Processing Sites and
Anaerobic Digesters
3.7 Support Extended Producer Responsibility
3.8 Develop and Fund-Zero Waste Initiatives
3.9 Support Funding and Technical Assistance to Electrify
Public and School Buses
Andrew Scipioni, Transportation
Planner
AScipioni@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0440
3.10 Increase Funding for State E-Bike Rebate Program Chad Millner, Director of
Engineering
CMillner@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0318
3.11 Establish State Funding to Support Expanded Carshare
Networks
3.12 Continue Support for Local Environmental Health
Regulatory Programs
Jeff Brown, Community Health
Administrator
JBrown@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0466
3.13 Support Funding Research, Training, and Legislation
for Applicators of Chloride-Containing De-Icing
Chemicals
Jessica Vanderwerff Wilson, Water
Resources Coordinator
JWilson@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0445
3.14 Inflow and Infiltration (I/I) Municipal Grant Program Ross Bintner, Engineering Services
Manager
RBintner@EdinaMN.gov
952-903-5713
STAFF REPORT Page 21
4 TRANSPORTATION
4.1 Continue Municipal State Aid (MSA) Funding Chad Millner, Director of Engineering
CMillner@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0318
Andrew Scipioni, Transportation
Planner
AScipioni@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0440
4.2 Increase Local Bridge Replacement Program (LBRP)
Funding
4.3 Expansion of Public Transportation Frequency and
Reach
4.4 Support Goals and Strategies to Reduce Vehicle
Miles Traveled
5 PUBLIC SAFETY
5.1 Emergency Medical Services Local Control Andrew Slama, Fire Chief
ASlama@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0332
5.2 Residential Fire Sprinklers
5.3 Support Funding for Auto Theft and Violent Crime
Investigation
Todd Milburn, Police Chief
TMilburn@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0487
5.4 Support Funding and Programming for Recruitment
and Retention Needs
5.5 Require K12 Threat Assessments
5.6 Increase Penalty for Fleeing in a Motor Vehicle and
Allow Use of Mobile Tracking Devices
5.7 Revise School Resource Officer Legislation
5.8 Arbitration Reform Kelly Curtin, Human Resources
Director
KCurtin@EdinaMN.gov
952-826-0402
1
DRAFT 2024
CITY POLICIES
Available online: www.lmc.org/draftpolicies
The League’s four policy committees, made up of over 150 city officials from around the
state, adopted the 2024 Draft City Policies during their final meetings in September.
Please take a moment to review the policies and submit comments.
You can also read the separate 2024 Policy Committee Highlights document to see a
summary of the changes and new policies the committees are recommending.
Send comments to policycomments@lmc.org
Comment period ends October 27, 2023
All member comments will be shared with the League Board of Directors before the Board
takes final action on the policies on Nov. 9. The policies will serve as a framework for the
League’s advocacy efforts during the 2024 legislative session. The City Policies are the only
comprehensive statewide advocacy agenda for all Minnesota cities.
POLICY DOCUMENT KEY:
Underlining indicates new language. (example)
Strikeouts indicate deleted language. (example)
2
Table of Contents
*asterisk indicates change to policy
IMPROVING SERVICE DELIVERY ............................................................................7
SD- 1. Local Control ......................................................................................................................7
SD- 2. Unfunded Mandates ...........................................................................................................7
SD- 3. Local Approval of Special Laws ........................................................................................8
SD- 4. Redesigning and Reinventing Government* ...................................................................8
SD- 5. State Government Shutdowns .........................................................................................10
SD- 6. Duration of Conservation Easements .............................................................................11
SD- 7. Racial Equity in Minnesota .............................................................................................12
SD- 8. Immigration Reform* ......................................................................................................14
SD- 9. Responsibility for Locating Private Underground Facilities........................................15
SD- 10. Utility Relocation Under Design-Build Road Construction .......................................17
SD- 11. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standards ...........................................17
SD- 12. Fire Mutual Aid ..............................................................................................................18
SD- 13. Clarification of Joint Powers Relationships with Federally Recognized Indian
Tribes .............................................................................................................................19
SD- 14. Ambulance Service Costs and Liability ........................................................................20
SD- 15. Emergency Medical Services .........................................................................................21
SD- 16. Fees for Service ...............................................................................................................22
SD-17. Fundraising Authority ....................................................................................................23
SD- 18. Improving and Increasing Citizen Access to Information ..........................................24
SD- 19. Administrative Fines for Code Violations ....................................................................25
SD- 20. Contracting and Purchasing ..........................................................................................26
SD- 21. City Enterprise Operations ...........................................................................................27
SD- 22. Preservation of Order in City Council Meetings .........................................................27
SD- 23. Constitutional Amendments ..........................................................................................28
SD- 24. Initiative and Referendum .............................................................................................28
SD- 25. Civil Liability of Local Governments ...........................................................................29
SD- 26. Private Property Rights and Takings ...........................................................................30
SD- 27. Organized Solid Waste Collection ................................................................................32
SD- 28. Private Well Drilling ......................................................................................................33
SD- 29. Sustainable Development* .............................................................................................34
SD- 30. Advanced Energy Building Standards* .......................................................................36
SD- 31. Construction Codes* ......................................................................................................38
SD- 32. Building Officials ............................................................................................................39
SD- 33. Disability Access Requirements ....................................................................................40
SD- 34. Assaults on Code Enforcement Officials ......................................................................42
SD- 35. Restrictions on Possession of Firearms.........................................................................42
SD- 36. Public Safety Communications .....................................................................................43
SD- 37. Collateral Consequences and Expungements* ............................................................44
SD- 38. Criminal and Juvenile Justice Information .................................................................47
SD- 39. Pawn Shop Regulation and Use of the Automated Property System (APS) .............48
SD- 40. City Costs for Enforcing State and Local Laws ..........................................................49
SD- 41. Compensation and Reimbursement for Public Safety Services .................................50
SD- 42. Administrative Traffic Citations ...................................................................................51
3
SD- 43. Juveniles in Municipal Jails ...........................................................................................52
SD- 44. Justice System Funding ..................................................................................................53
SD- 45. 21st Century Policing ......................................................................................................54
SD- 46. Post-Incarceration Living Facilities ..............................................................................56
SD- 47. Homeland Security Costs and Liability* ......................................................................56
SD- 48. Cybersecurity* ................................................................................................................57
SD- 49. Legalization of Fireworks ..............................................................................................58
SD- 50. Traffic Enforcement Cameras*.....................................................................................60
SD- 51. Operation of Motorized Foot Scooters .........................................................................60
SD- 52. Catalytic Converter Theft* ............................................................................................61
SD- 53. Drug Courts ....................................................................................................................62
SD- 54. Drug Paraphernalia*......................................................................................................62
SD- 55. Regulation of Massage Therapists ................................................................................63
SD- 56. Regulation of Adult-Use Cannabis and Cannabinoid Products*...............................65
SD- 57. Lawful Gambling and Local Control ...........................................................................69
SD- 58. Liquor Liability Insurance Limits ................................................................................70
SD- 59. On-Sale Liquor or Wine Licenses .................................................................................71
SD- 60. Liquor Licensing of Non-Contiguous Spaces ...............................................................71
SD- 61. Wine and Off-Sale Licenses ...........................................................................................72
SD- 62. Youth Access to Alcohol and Tobacco ..........................................................................72
SD- 63. Consumer Small Loans ..................................................................................................73
SD- 64. Regulation of Mobile Businesses ...................................................................................74
SD- 65. Regulation of Party Buses and Boats-for-Hire ............................................................74
SD- 66. Environmental Protection..............................................................................................76
SD- 67. Impaired Waters .............................................................................................................79
SD- 68. Municipal Public Water Supplies .................................................................................81
SD- 69. Municipal Electric Utilities ............................................................................................83
SD- 70. State Support for Municipal Energy Policy Goals ......................................................84
SD- 71. Urban Forest Management Funding* ..........................................................................86
SD- 72. City Pesticide Application Authority* ..........................................................................87
SD- 73. Election Issues* ...............................................................................................................87
SD- 74. Administering Absentee Balloting and Early Voting* ................................................88
SD- 75. Loss of Felon Voting Rights* .........................................................................................92
SD- 76. Write-in Candidates in City Elections* ........................................................................92
SD- 77. Ranked Choice Voting* .................................................................................................93
SD- 78. Voter Assistance*............................................................................................................94
SD- 79. Electronic Rosters* .........................................................................................................95
SD- 80. Election Judge Recruitment and Retention .................................................................95
SD-81. Mail Balloting*.................................................................................................................97
SD-82. Modernizing Charter Amendment Process ..................................................................97
SD-83. Presidential Nomination Primary ..................................................................................98
SD-84. Health Care Facility Voting* ..........................................................................................98
SD-85. Voters Experiencing Homelessness ..............................................................................100
SD-86. Voter Registration .........................................................................................................100
SD-NEW A. Operation of Electric Assisted Bicycles* ............................................................103
4
IMPROVING LOCAL ECONOMIES ........................................................................104
LE- 1. Growth Management and Annexation .........................................................................104
LE- 2. Wildlife Management Areas ..........................................................................................105
LE- 3. Official State Mapping Responsibility..........................................................................106
LE- 4. Electric Service Extension .............................................................................................107
LE- 5. Statutory Approval Timelines .......................................................................................108
LE- 6. Maintenance of Retaining Walls Adjacent to Public Rights of Way .........................110
LE- 7. Development Disputes ....................................................................................................111
LE- 8. Foreclosure and Neighborhood Stabilization* ............................................................111
LE- 9. Housing Policy* ..............................................................................................................114
LE- 10. Resources for Affordable Housing*............................................................................116
LE- 11. Greater Minnesota Housing* ......................................................................................120
LE- 12. Energy Efficiency Improvement Requirements for Housing ...................................122
LE- 13. In-Home Day Care Facilities .......................................................................................124
LE- 14. Residential Programs ...................................................................................................124
LE- 15. Inclusionary Housing ...................................................................................................126
LE- 16. Community Land Trusts* ...........................................................................................127
LE- 17. Telecommunications and Information Technology ..................................................128
LE- 18. Broadband*...................................................................................................................128
LE- 19. Cable Franchising Authority*.....................................................................................132
LE- 20. Public Right-of-Way Management* ...........................................................................134
LE- 21. Wireless Infrastructure and Equipment Siting .........................................................136
LE- 22. County Economic Development Authorities..............................................................136
LE- 23. Local Appropriations to Economic Development Organizations ............................137
LE- 24. Workforce Readiness ...................................................................................................137
LE- 25. Business Development Programs ................................................................................138
LE- 26. Remediation and Redevelopment ...............................................................................139
LE- 27. Development Authority Levy Limits ..........................................................................140
LE- 28. Tax Increment Financing (TIF)* ................................................................................141
LE- 29. Property Tax Abatement Authority ...........................................................................143
LE- 30. Opportunity Zones* .....................................................................................................144
LE- 31. Revisions to the OSA Audit Function .........................................................................145
LE- 32. OSA Time Limitations .................................................................................................146
LE- 33. Workforce Housing ......................................................................................................147
LE- 34. Development Along Transit Corridors ......................................................................149
LE- 35. Authority to Create Public Infrastructure Utilities ..................................................150
LE- 36. Adequate Funding for Transportation* .....................................................................151
LE- 37. Turnbacks of County and State Roads ......................................................................153
LE- 38. MnDOT Rights-of-Way Maintenance ........................................................................154
LE-39. Funding for Non-Municipal State Aid City Streets* ................................................ 154
LE- 40. Authority to Allow Amenities in MnDOT Rights-of-Way .......................................156
LE- 41. Complete Streets* .........................................................................................................157
LE- 42. Authority to Implement Infrastructure Fees .............................................................157
LE- 43. Safe Routes to School Grants Management ...............................................................158
LE- 44. Railroads* .....................................................................................................................159
LE- 45. Airport Planning and Funding....................................................................................161
5
LE- 46. Airport Safety Zones ....................................................................................................162
LE-NEW A. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Vehicle Miles Traveled Assessment
Requirements on Trunk Highway Projects* ...........................................................164
LE-NEW B. Comprehensive Plans and Environmental Review* .........................................165
HUMAN RESOURCES & DATA PRACTICES ........................................................166
HR-1. Personnel Mandates and Limits on Local Control* ....................................................166
HR-2. Earned Sick and Safe Time* .........................................................................................167
HR-3. Pay Equity Compliance ..................................................................................................168
HR-4. Public Employment Labor Relations Act (PELRA)* .................................................168
HR-5. Implications of Janus v. AFSCME ................................................................................170
HR-6. Public Employment Relations Board* ..........................................................................171
HR-7. Essential Employees .......................................................................................................172
HR-8. Re-employment Benefits ................................................................................................173
HR-9. Public Employee Defined Benefit Pension Plans* .......................................................173
HR-10. Deferred Compensation ...............................................................................................178
HR-11. Continued Health Insurance for Duty Disabled Peace Officers and Firefighters* 178
HR-12. Health Care Insurance Programs ...............................................................................180
HR-13. Workers’ Compensation* ............................................................................................182
HR-14. Public Safety Duty Disability* .....................................................................................184
HR-15. Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace*...........................................................187
HR-16. Veterans Preference .....................................................................................................188
HR-17. Military Leave Reimbursement ..................................................................................189
HR-18. Tele-Health Exams .......................................................................................................190
HR-NEW A. Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Plan Membership
Eligibility for Fire Department Employees* ............................................................190
Data Practices .................................................................................................................192
DP-1. Data Practices Compliance Costs ..................................................................................193
DP-2. Records Retention Compliance Costs ...........................................................................195
DP-3. Updating the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act* ........................................195
DP-4. Maintaining Government Data in Large Databases ....................................................197
DP-5. Sharing of Student Data with Local Law Enforcement in Emergencies* .................198
DP-6. Disclosure of Victim Data ...............................................................................................198
DP-7. Challenges to the Accuracy of Data ...............................................................................199
DP-8. Law Enforcement Technologies .....................................................................................200
DP-9. Body-Worn Cameras ......................................................................................................202
DP-10. Open Meeting Law ........................................................................................................203
DP-11. Needed Closed Meeting Exceptions to the Open Meeting Law ................................203
DP-12. Remote Participation under the Open Meeting Law* ...............................................205
Federal Employment Law .............................................................................................206
FED-1. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) .................................206
FED-2. Flexible Spending Accounts* .......................................................................................207
FED-3. IRS Regulations on Death Benefits .............................................................................208
FED-4. Federal Public Safety Collective Bargaining Bill.......................................................208
6
FED-5. Federal Health Care Reform* .....................................................................................209
FED-6. Amended Internal Revenue Code Regarding 403(b) Retirement Plans ..................209
FED-7. Amended Internal Revenue Code Regarding Health Savings Account Eligibility
and Medicare Enrollment ..........................................................................................210
NEW FED A. ACA Reporting* ................................................................................................211
IMPROVING FISCAL FUTURES ..............................................................................213
FF- 1. State-Local Fiscal Relations ...........................................................................................213
FF- 2. State Budget Stability* ...................................................................................................214
FF- 3. Funding Local Government Aid* .................................................................................215
FF- 4. State Charges for Administrative Services ...................................................................218
FF- 5. Reporting Requirements ................................................................................................218
FF- 6. Taxation Duplication ......................................................................................................220
FF- 7. Direct Property Tax Relief Programs* .........................................................................221
FF- 8. Sales Tax on Local Government Purchases .................................................................222
FF- 9. Taxation of Electronic Commerce ................................................................................223
FF- 10. Local Lodging Taxes.....................................................................................................223
FF- 11. Taxation of Electric Generation Personal Property ..................................................224
FF- 12. Electric Generation Taxation Reform ........................................................................225
FF- 13. Support for Transitioning Communities* ..................................................................226
FF- 14. Taxation of Municipal Bond Interest ..........................................................................228
FF- 15. Pollution Control Exemption .......................................................................................228
FF- 16. Representative Democracy and Local Control ..........................................................229
FF- 17. Tax Hearing and Notification Process* ......................................................................230
FF- 18. General Election Requirement for Ballot Questions .................................................231
FF- 19. City Fund Balances .......................................................................................................231
FF- 20. Local Option Sales Tax and City Revenue Diversification* .....................................232
FF- 21. City Franchise Authority .............................................................................................235
FF- 22. Utility Valuation Transition Aid* ...............................................................................236
FF- 23. State Assistance for Property Tax Refunds for State-Assessed Property ...............237
FF- 24. Transition for Property Acquired by Tax-Exempt Entities .....................................238
FF- 25. Payments for Services to Tax-Exempt Property ........................................................238
FF- 26. Housing Improvement Areas and Special Service Districts Petitioned by Business*
......................................................................................................................................239
FF- 27. Tax-Forfeited Properties and Local Special Assessments ........................................240
FF- 28. Distribution of Proceeds from the Sale of Tax-Forfeit Property .............................241
FF- 29. State Hazard Mitigation and Response Support .......................................................243
FF- 30. Library Funding* .........................................................................................................243
FF- 31. Park and Library Land Tax Break .............................................................................246
FF- 32. Increasing Safe School Levy Authority ......................................................................246
FF- 33. Equitable Funding of Community Education Services* ...........................................247
FF- 34. Street Reconstruction Bond Approval ........................................................................247
FF- 35. Special Assessment Election Requirements................................................................248
FF- 36. Homestead Market Value Exclusion* .........................................................................248
FF- 37. State Fund for Non-weather-related Disaster/Catastrophe Relief ...........................249
FF- NEW A. Park Dedication* .................................................................................................250
7
IMPROVING SERVICE DELIVERY 1
SD-1. Local Control 2
Issue: Cities are often laboratories for determining public policy approaches to the challenges that 3
face citizens. Success in providing for the basic needs of a functional society is rooted in local 4
control to determine how best to respond to the ever-changing needs of a citizenry. Because city 5
government most directly impacts the lives of people, and representative democracy ensures that 6
locally elected officials are held accountable for their decisions through local elections, local 7
governments must have sufficient authority and flexibility to meet the challenges of governing and 8
providing citizens with public services. 9
Response: The increasingly complex and costly requirements necessary for cities to provide 10
services to their citizens would benefit from a strong partnership between federal, state and 11
local governments. This partnership should be based upon a shared vision for Minnesota and 12
should allow individual communities to tailor that vision to the unique needs of their citizens 13
without mandates and policy restrictions imposed by state and federal policy makers. The 14
state should recognize that local governments, of all sizes, are often the first to identify 15
problems and inventive solutions to solve them, and should encourage further innovation by 16
increasing local control. The state should not enact initiatives that erode the fundamental 17
principle of local control in cities across Minnesota. 18
SD-2. Unfunded Mandates 19
Issue: Federal and state mandated programs substitute the judgment of Congress, the president, the 20
Minnesota Legislature, and the governor for local budget priorities. These mandates force cities to 21
reduce funding for other basic services or to increase taxes and service charges. 22
Response: 23
a) Existing unfunded mandates should be reviewed and modified or repealed where 24
possible. 25
8
b) No additional statewide mandates should be enacted unless full funding for the mandate 1
is provided by the level of government imposing it or a permanent stable revenue source 2
is established. 3
c) Cities should not be forced to comply with unfunded mandates. 4
d) Cities should be given the greatest flexibility possible in implementing mandates to 5
ensure their cost is minimized. 6
SD-3. Local Approval of Special Laws 7
Issue: The Minnesota Constitution prohibits special legislation except for certain special laws 8
relating to local government. It provides that a special law must name the affected local unit of 9
government and is effective only after approval by the local government unit, unless general state 10
law provides otherwise. Under (Minn. Stat. §§ 645.021-645.024), a special law is not effective 11
unless approved by the affected local unit of government, except under limited circumstances. 12
In recent years, the Legislature has occasionally enacted general laws that affect a single local unit 13
of government. By enacting a general law with limited application, local approval is not required. 14
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the Constitutional requirement that a 15
special law must be approved by the affected local unit of government before it can take 16
effect. If a law is intended to affect or benefit a single local unit of government, the 17
Legislature must follow the requirements for enacting a special law set forth in the 18
Minnesota Constitution and in Minn. Stat. §§ 645.021-645.024. The League specifically 19
opposes the Legislature's technique of bypassing the Constitution by not naming the local 20
government, but describing the local government in such narrow terms that it can only apply 21
to one entity. 22
SD-4. Redesigning and Reinventing Government* 23
Issue: Every level of government is redesigning, reinventing, and reevaluating its organizational 24
structure and programs in response to financial realities and citizens’ needs and problems. 25
Reforms, however, must be more than change for the sake of change to existing programs. It is 26
9
imperative that government officials talk with citizens about how services are currently provided 1
and how they can be best provided in the future. 2
To be meaningful, redesign of governmental entities and services should: 3
a) save money where feasible; 4
b) deliver improved services; 5
c) serve essential needs; and 6
d) be equitably structured. 7
Cities have and will continue to re-evaluate city programs and services, pursue the use of 8
cooperative agreements, and consider organizational changes that provide greater government 9
efficiency and result in better service to citizens. Citizen input and participation should be gathered 10
and taken into account as decisions about service delivery are being made and implemented. 11
All levels of government are encouraged to: 12
a) Ensure that in redesigning, reinventing or reassigning government services and programs, the 13
appropriate level of service to citizens is evaluated and citizen demands and expectations are 14
adequately addressed. 15
b) Engage as many citizens as possible, from diverse backgrounds and interests, to determine 16
what services matter most to citizens and how the delivery of those services can be changed to 17
increase efficiency and lower cost. 18
c) Educate citizens about what services government delivers, how they are delivered, and how 19
those services are funded. 20
d) Engage in traditional and nontraditional partnerships to make service changes and do things in 21
new ways. 22
e) Identify and repeal programs or discontinue services that are no longer necessary, and evaluate 23
which services can readily and fairly be provided by the private sector. 24
10
Response: Federal, state, and county governments should: 1
a) Promote and support local redesign efforts through incentives rather than mandates. 2
a) Communicate and establish a process of negotiation before shifting responsibility for 3
delivering services from one level of government to another, or seeking to reduce service 4
duplication. 5
b) Utilize government entities with proven track records in redesign efforts. 6
SD-5. State Government Shutdowns 7
Issue: Twice in less than one decade, the state Legislature and governor failed to reach a global 8
agreement on the state budget by the end of the fiscal biennium (June 30 of odd-numbered years). 9
As a result of these impasses, portions of state government were shut down. The shutdowns, 10
particularly the shutdown in 2011, created a range of challenges for cities, as well as for the state’s 11
courts, residents, businesses, licensed professionals, state employees and others. 12
For cities, the most pronounced challenges related to the shutdowns were as follows: 13
a) Uncertainty about the timing and amount of aid and credit reimbursement payments and the 14
distribution of local sales tax revenues. 15
b) Inability of licensed city professionals such as peace officers and water treatment facility 16
operators to renew licenses. 17
c) Loss of access to critical information such as the Bureau of Criminal Apprehension database 18
and state-mandated reports. 19
d) The shutdown of transportation projects on the trunk highway and state aid system. 20
e) Interruption of local economic development due to the state having sole authority to inspect, 21
review and approve various plans and types of projects. 22
Although the 2011 shutdown ultimately resulted in judicially-ordered continuation of many state 23
government services, a 2017 Minnesota Supreme Court decision (A17-1142) would likely 24
11
exacerbate the impacts on cities in a future state government shutdown. In that decision, the court 1
stressed that “Article XI, Section 1 of the Minnesota Constitution does not permit judicially 2
ordered funding for the Legislative Branch in the absence of an appropriation.” The effect of the 3
2017 decision has yet to be tested. 4
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities urges the Legislature and governor to establish a 5
procedure in state law to continue certain state government operations into a new biennium 6
in the event that the governor and legislators cannot reach a budget agreement. Specifically, 7
the Legislature and governor should modify state law to assure that the staff necessary to 8
distribute state funds that are already encumbered or statutorily appropriated to local 9
governments are distributed as statutorily scheduled, or in the absence of a statutory 10
payment schedule, are released in a predictable and timely manner in the event of future 11
shutdowns. 12
The Legislature should also pass legislation that allows existing licenses of public employees 13
to be continued during any future state government shutdown and should identify additional 14
areas, such as electrical and plumbing inspection and plumbing plan review, where local 15
governments could reasonably step in to handle the inspections, review, and approval 16
necessary for local projects to move forward, and allows work on approved projects to 17
continue in state rights-of-way. 18
SD-6. Duration of Conservation Easements 19
Issue: The Minnesota Marketable Title Act provides that any deed over 40 years old can be 20
disregarded unless the holder of the interest re-records it. There is an exception for a person in 21
possession of the property. A 2010 Minnesota Supreme Court decision said that the person in 22
possession has to show that the possession has been visible enough to put a prudent person on 23
notice of the interest, and that the possession has to be continuous. Sampair v. Village of 24
Birchwood, 784 N.W.2d 65 (Minn. 2010). 25
This creates issues for cities that have conservation easements. It is difficult, if not impossible, to 26
show actual use of the easement because conservation easements are passive easements, not active 27
ones. As a result, cities will have to re-record the easements every 40 years in order to maintain 28
12
them. This will result in a significant administrative burden and increase costs for local units of 1
government due to staff time, legal fees, and recording fees. 2
Additionally, Minn. Stat. § 500.20, entitled “Defeasible Estates,” provides in subd. 2a that private 3
covenants, conditions, or restrictions that affect the title or use of real estate cease to be valid 30 4
years after the date of the instrument creating them and they may be disregarded. This provision 5
was initially enacted in 1988. 6
Minn. Stat. ch. 84C regarding conservation easements was enacted in 1985, and Minn. Stat. §§ 7
84.64-.65 regarding conservation restrictions were originally enacted in 1974. Because 8
conservation easements and conservation restrictions are not listed among the restrictions that are 9
not subject to Minn. Stat. § 500.20, subd. 2a, it is possible to conclude, by negative implication, 10
that subd. 2a does apply to the conservation easements and conservation restrictions created by 11
earlier enacted statues. This conclusion is inconsistent with the language in Minn. Stat. § 12
84C.02(b) that “a conservation easement is unlimited in duration unless the instrument creating it 13
otherwise provides.” 14
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports legislation that excepts holders of 15
conservation easements from re-recording the easements under the Minnesota Marketable 16
Title Act and that clarifies that Minn. Stat. § 500.20, subd. 2a, does not apply to conservation 17
easements and restrictions. 18
SD-7. Racial Equity in Minnesota 19
Issue: Since the earliest days of its history, race and racial inequity issues have been present in 20
Minnesota. Land acquisition and ownership, discriminatory covenants restricting homeownership 21
to white Minnesotans, and patterns of systemic, structural, and institutional racism have brought 22
the state to experience some of the worst racial disparities in the country for employment, housing, 23
education, health, criminal justice, and law enforcement. Explicit and implicit bias toward people 24
of color is prevalent in public policies and other rules governing Minnesota residents. Racial 25
equity is accomplished when race can no longer be used to predict success, and we have 26
government and systems that work for all. 27
13
The data is readily available from the U.S. Census, the state demographer, and local government. 1
For example, Minnesota ranks 50th in the nation for median income equality and 49th in 2
homeownership equality. The killing of George Floyd and the disproportionate impact of COVID-3
19 on communities of color have further highlighted the critical need to overhaul our laws, 4
policies, and practices to address systemic racism. 5
Racial demographics are continually changing throughout the state. According to the state 6
demographer, 20 percent of Minnesota’s population are people of color. All racial groups have 7
recently increased in the state, but between 2010 and 2018, Minnesota has added five times as 8
many people of color as white residents. 9
While every city may be in a different place, the need for racial equity and the need to repair past 10
racial harms touches all communities, from the most racially diverse cities to cities with very few 11
or no people of color. In recognition of the need to strive for racial equity, cities are invested in 12
building a more equitable future when every resident can thrive regardless of race. Among efforts 13
cities are undertaking are: 14
a) Examining how cities deliver services and set local policies among city staff and elected 15
officials; 16
b) Creating high-level staff positions and departments to address race equity, financial and 17
educational opportunity, diversity, and analysis of city policies; 18
c) Engaging with the communities of color to build/rebuild relationships and trust; 19
d) Establishing city commissions to address race and racial equity issues with local affected 20
communities; and 21
e) Working to improve access to city procurement opportunities for veteran-, woman-, and 22
minority-owned businesses. 23
However, cities acknowledge that there is much work that still needs to be done before success for 24
all Minnesotans can be achieved regardless of race. To optimize success for all Minnesotans, cities 25
cannot work in isolation on racial equity issues. 26
14
Further, it should be acknowledged that community members who are both from communities of 1
color and are immigrants require local governments to understand the intersection between these 2
two issues and evaluate public policy initiatives from multiple social justice perspectives. League 3
policies on immigration and racial equity are heavily interrelated in that situation. 4
Response: In order to best support and serve all Minnesotans, the State should take a 5
leadership role by prioritizing addressing racial equity through its actions: 6
a) Partner with local government and communities of color to identify and address racial 7
equity issues; 8
b) Proactively assess past racial harms and develop actions to address them; 9
c) Collect and provide data disaggregated by race necessary for cities and the state to make 10
informed decisions about how to address racial disparities; 11
d) Develop a state system for the proactive and innovative development and delivery of 12
resources to local government to address racial equity including policy and service 13
options, local engagement tools, policy expertise, and financial resources; and 14
e) Actively review and amend existing statutory language to identify laws that contribute to 15
racial inequities and consider racial equity impacts when crafting proposed legislation 16
and policies. 17
SD-8. Immigration Reform* 18
Issue: The United States and the State of Minnesota have long traditions of welcoming 19
immigrants. Immigrants strengthen Minnesota by contributing to the state’s economy, enhancing 20
cultural resources, and participating in efforts to build strong communities. 21
According to the National League of Cities, roughly 35 percent of undocumented immigrants have 22
lived in the United States for 10 years or more. Approximately 1.6 million undocumented 23
immigrants are children, and another 3.1 million children in the United States have at least one 24
undocumented parent. These families are forced to live “underground” and are unable to get 25
15
drivers’ licenses or car insurance in most states. In addition, they are unlikely to obtain health 1
insurance and are afraid to report crimes to local law enforcement. 2
Since immigrants are barred from most federal public assistance, the burden of providing social 3
services, education, and health care falls to state and local governments that are increasingly 4
feeling the financial impact of both legal and illegal immigrants living in their communities. 5
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities, together with the National League of Cities, urges 6
Congress to move quickly to enact and enforce effective immigration laws. 7
Federal and state governments must not transfer responsibility for enforcing U.S. 8
immigration laws to local personnel, including police officers, firefighters, educators, health 9
professionals, and social service employees. Federal and state governments must not prohibit 10
local units of government from implementing policies aimed at fostering positive 11
relationships between local government officials, including law enforcement personnel, and 12
immigrant communities. Finally, the League supports funding for a Minnesota Office of New 13
Americans within the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development 14
(DEED) which, among other responsibilities, would develop and deliver career readiness 15
services to Minnesota’s immigrant workers. 16
SD-9. Responsibility for Locating Private Underground Facilities 17
Issue: Cities are responsible for complying with state pipeline safety regulations that hold cities 18
responsible for locating and marking private service laterals that connect in public rights-of-way to 19
city sanitary and storm sewer, water, and district heating systems. The Minnesota Office of 20
Pipeline Safety (MNOPS) is proposing amendments to state pipeline and safety rules related to the 21
definition of excavation and changes to mandatory damage reporting. 22
Cities are concerned that damage to private service laterals within the public right-of-way 23
continues due, in part, to construction methods during the replacement, repair and/or installation of 24
underground utilities which cross city water and sewer services that are in the public rights-of-25
way. Trenchless excavation could potentially cause damage to underground service laterals and 26
negatively impact the quality of utility services. 27
16
Response: The League supports the changes to the definition of excavation presented by 1
MNOPS at the 2012 Review of Minn. Stat. ch. 216D. Cities support the elimination of 2
windbreaks, shelterbelts, and tree plantations from the definition of excavation, unless any of 3
these activities disturbs the soil to a depth of 18 inches or more. 4
The League supports exempting normal maintenance of roads and streets from the definition 5
of excavation if the maintenance does not change the original grade and does not involve the 6
road ditch by defining “original grade” as the grade at the date of issue of the first notice by 7
the excavator. 8
The League supports increasing MNOPS fines for violators of state pipeline safety 9
requirements, bringing state penalties in line with federal penalties. 10
The League opposes mandatory damage reporting and recommends a simple standardized 11
form to encourage cities to voluntarily report damages. The League opposes requirements 12
that would force cities to mark underground facilities of all sizes and materials. 13
The League recognizes that trenchless excavation presents concerns to cities. Private 14
property owners in the excavation area must receive advance notice of any trenchless or 15
other excavation activities that could affect the quality of utility services. Notice must 16
include at least one phone number for assistance in case of any service problems. 17
Contractors must comply with city permits requiring that the drill head be visible when 18
crossing any paint marks and moving through the pothole at the depth that the city allows 19
for the installation. 20
Cities must not be required to locate privately-owned water and sewer laterals and must not 21
be held responsible for actions by excavators when the city determines not to locate such 22
facilities. Excavators should be responsible for locating and protecting any private service 23
lateral that is impacted by excavation activities conducted on private property beyond the 24
public right-of-way. 25
17
SD-10. Utility Relocation Under Design-Build Road Construction 1
Issue: The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has promoted legislation relating 2
to the design-build construction process that would require private and public utilities to be 3
responsible for utility relocation necessitated by road construction. The policy, if enacted, would 4
create unanticipated costs for utilities owned and operated by cities. Municipally-owned utilities 5
would be unreasonably held to the same standards as privately-owned utilities that exist in the 6
public right-of-way. 7
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports use of the design-build procedure, 8
however, municipal utilities that exist in the public right-of-way should not be penalized 9
under this process. Municipal utilities legitimately exist in the public right-of-way. When a 10
MnDOT construction project requires the relocation of utilities, the cost of relocating 11
municipal utilities should be shared equitably between MnDOT and affected municipal 12
utilities. 13
SD-11. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standards 14
Issue: The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) is an international association of 15
individuals and trade and professional organizations that deals with fire and life safety. The NFPA 16
has advocated legislation that would mandate two standards: NFPA 1710, Organization and 17
Deployment of Fire Suppression Operations, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special 18
Operations to the Public by Career Fire Departments, and NFPA 1720, Organization and 19
Deployment of Fire Suppression, Emergency Medical Operations, and Special Operations to the 20
Public by Volunteer Fire Departments. NFPA standards 1710 and 1720 define minimum response 21
times, minimum fire company staffing levels, initial full alarm response levels, and extra alarm 22
response levels. Although NFPA codes and standards are voluntary, they are often adopted by 23
local jurisdictions. 24
Response: Levels of service delivery for fire and emergency medical services (EMS) have 25
always been determined by local jurisdictions. If mandated, the NFPA standards would force 26
local governments to shift dollars from fire prevention programs to fire suppression 27
activities, potentially increasing the risk of fire and the danger to local firefighters. 28
18
The League supports permanent and ongoing state funding to assist fire departments 1
statewide to improve emergency response and work toward industry standards. 2
The League of Minnesota Cities opposes any attempt to mandate standards for minimum 3
staffing levels of fire, specialized or EMS vehicles controlled by units of local government. 4
The League also opposes any attempt to adopt a standard dictating or affecting the response 5
time of any fire, specialized or EMS vehicle. 6
SD-12. Fire Mutual Aid 7
Issue: City and township fire departments regularly assist each other with firefighting and other 8
response activities. This mutual aid is mostly authorized by individual written contracts with each 9
city or township, which results in a patchwork of different agreements with different provisions. 10
Often, each city attorney recommends different provisions. 11
Following the Red River floods and the St. Peter tornados, emergency responders (including fire 12
departments) met and helped pass a statute to govern mutual aid situations when there is an 13
emergency declared by mayor or governor and no written agreements exist. The statute, Minn. 14
Stat. § 12.331, provides a framework for how worker’s compensation, liability, property claims, 15
insurance, and charges between the departments will be handled in mutual aid situations. 16
The League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) developed a model mutual aid 17
agreement that contains the same basic structure for liability as the statute. Many cities have 18
entered into area-wide mutual aid agreements that are similar to the LMCIT model agreement. To 19
provide uniformity, there should be a statute that is similar to Minn. Stat. § 12.331, to govern daily 20
fire mutual aid situations that do not rise to the level of emergencies. 21
Response: The Legislature should pass a statute to provide uniform provisions when fire 22
departments assist each other. These provisions should include statutory definitions and 23
clarifications for: 24
a) Who is in command of the mutual aid scene. 25
b) Who will cover the firefighters for worker's compensation. 26
19
c) How liability and property claims will be handled. 1
d) Who will pay for expendable supplies such as foam. 2
e) When fire departments will charge each other for these services. 3
f) The ability for fire departments to opt out by having a separate written agreement. 4
SD-13. Clarification of Joint Powers Relationships with Federally Recognized 5
Indian Tribes 6
Issue: During the 2010 legislative session, Minn. Stat. § 471.59 was modified to allow federally 7
recognized Indian tribes to participate in joint powers agreements with other governmental entities, 8
including Minnesota cities. Indian tribes are extremely unique legal entities under federal law and 9
international treaties. The new law was a broad brush authorization that did not address important 10
issues that uniquely arise when dealing with Indian tribes related to sovereignty, insurance liability 11
and liability limits (commonly called “tort caps”). Previous laws, such as Minn. Stat. § 626.93 12
(authorizing tribes to act as law enforcement entities) explicitly addressed these concerns. Since 13
the new law passed, interest has been expressed by public safety groups and individual cities in 14
entering into joint powers agreements with federally recognized Indian tribes. However, 15
legislative guidance is needed to address concerns related to sovereignty, insurance and liability 16
limits for these agreements. 17
Response: Include in Minn. Stat. § 471.59 (the joint powers statute) language substantially 18
similar to Minn. Stat. § 626.93 that clarifies that Indian tribes entering into joint powers 19
relationships agree to: 20
a) Be subject to liability for its torts and those of its officers, employees, and agents acting 21
within the scope of their employment or duties arising out of the joint powers agreement 22
to the same extent as a municipality under Minn. Stat. ch. 466; and 23
b) Notwithstanding Minn. Stat. § 16C.05, subd. 7, waive its sovereign immunity with respect 24
to claims arising from liability under the joint powers. 25
20
SD-14. Ambulance Service Costs and Liability 1
Issue: The cost of providing ambulance care has increased steadily over the last several years due 2
in part to changes in Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement. The federal Balanced Budget Act 3
(BBA) of 1997 made two significant changes to ambulance billing. First, the act mandated that all 4
ambulance services accept Medicare and Medicaid assignments as payment in full; that is, 5
ambulance services cannot bill the Medicare or Medicaid patient for any unpaid balance beyond 6
the Medicare or Medicaid assignment. Second, the act mandated a uniform fee schedule that was 7
implemented in April 2002. The new fee schedule significantly reduced reimbursement levels for 8
many ambulance services. In addition, in most cases Medicare does not pay for costs related to 9
treatment of patients that are not transported. The BBA mandates are impacting the ability of some 10
Minnesota ambulance service providers to adequately fund their operations. 11
The loss of revenue due to Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement changes, coupled with higher 12
insurance rates, is affecting the ability of many ambulance service providers to deliver emergency 13
care, particularly in rural Minnesota. All ambulance services and personnel are regulated by Minn. 14
Stat. ch. 144E and must comply with the same licensing, training, and equipment-related 15
requirements, regardless of ownership. 16
In addition, the liability exposure of medical directors associated with ambulance service is a 17
concern. While medical directors of government-based ambulance services may arguably be 18
covered by public official immunity, the law is unclear and should be clarified. 19
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports federal legislation that would: 20
a) Require Medicare to set ambulance payment rates to cover the cost of providing service 21
for both transport and non-transport care of patients; 22
b) Require adequate reimbursement for ambulance providers; 23
c) Require Medicare to reimburse for 911 ambulance transports regardless of medical 24
necessity; 25
21
d) Make it easier for providers to file claims with Medicare by eliminating a processing 1
system that often leads to the rejection of legitimate reimbursement claims. 2
If the federal government does not increase Medicare and Medicaid rates in the immediate 3
future to fully reimburse providers for the cost of treating and transporting patients, the 4
state should provide defined additional funding to offset the gap 5
The League also urges the Legislature to extend the protection of the state and municipal 6
Tort Claims Act to licensed third parties that contract with a municipality to provide 7
ambulance services. The League also supports extending the applicability of public official 8
immunity to medical directors in the course of ambulance service activities. 9
SD-15. Emergency Medical Services 10
Issue: The Emergency Medical Services Regulatory Board (EMSRB) is the State of Minnesota’s 11
regulatory entity that oversees and issues ambulance licenses. The EMSRB has the authority to 12
designate exclusive emergency medical services (EMS) operating areas, or primary service areas 13
(PSAs), for ambulance providers. Once a provider has been approved to operate in a PSA, the 14
provider is authorized to serve that PSA for an indefinite period of time. Currently, no other health 15
licensing board in Minnesota grants a provider an exclusive operating area. 16
Historically, health licensing boards have played a critical role in setting professional standards 17
and establishing credentialing processes. However, the EMSRB has not imposed operational 18
standards to ensure an area has adequate coverage and service level such as response time 19
requirements on EMS providers. Furthermore, there is currently no oversight of ambulance billing 20
rates. The current system does not require ambulance services to disclose the number of 21
ambulances staffed, where an ambulance is responding from or any other important data points 22
that would ensure a community is receiving quality ambulance services. The lack of transparency 23
within Minnesota’s ambulance industry compromises accountability by EMS providers. 24
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports: 25
22
a) Allowing local units of government to designate which licensed ambulance service 1
provider or providers may serve their communities and to determine the appropriate 2
level of service; 3
b) Providing local units of government with tools and authority to ensure transparency by 4
EMS providers; 5
c) Uncoupling the professional standards overview role of the EMSRB from the service area 6
determination; 7
d) Requiring the membership of the EMSRB to be regionally balanced between Greater 8
Minnesota and the metropolitan area; 9
e) Modifying the membership of the EMSRB to include representatives of municipal 10
ambulance services; 11
f) Legislative consideration of setting term limits for EMSRB members; 12
g) Continued authority for the EMSRB to set professional standards; and 13
h) Requiring the EMSRB to submit biennial reports on EMS service delivery data points for 14
each local unit of government to appropriate legislative committees. 15
SD-16. Fees for Service 16
Issue: While general services—such as permitting, inspections or enforcement—are typically 17
funded out of a city’s general fund, cities often impose fees to cover the cost of providing certain 18
services, permits, and licenses. 19
The Legislature and interest groups often seek to mandate or preserve fee limitations for city 20
services. Over the last several years, the Legislature has enacted a number of new laws designed to 21
rigorously control local fee-setting authority. Examples of such mandates include placing limits on 22
coin-operated amusement machine license fees, on-sale and off-sale liquor license fees, license 23
fees for retailers selling fireworks, deputy registrar fees and planning and zoning fees. The state 24
23
also requires cities that collect more than $5,000 in development-related fees each year to annually 1
report all construction and development fees to the Department of Labor and Industry. 2
Response: While the state has a role in providing a general, statewide funding policy, the 3
state should not interfere in the decision-making functions performed by cities when setting 4
city budgets to provide city services. The League of Minnesota Cities seeks authority for 5
cities to charge fees that are reasonably related to the cost of providing the service, permit or 6
license. The League opposes legislation that would require specific methods to pay for city 7
services or would place caps on city fees. 8
SD-17. Fundraising Authority 9
Issue: Recent years have seen an increase in cities looking to find ways to accept donations for 10
specific projects that community members, non-profit organizations, or businesses have interest in. 11
Though there is authority for cities to accept gifts under Minn. Stat. § 465.04, an opinion from the 12
Office of the State Auditor has stated that cities lack the authority to fundraise. 13
There are specific situations in which city personnel can solicit contributions. Under Minn. Stat. § 14
465.90, firefighters are authorized to solicit charitable contributions from motorists for a charitable 15
organization. Under Minn. Stat. § 471.198, a city may authorize officials and staff to solicit 16
contributions for the purposes of funding National Night Out or any event or purpose that the 17
governing body determines will foster positive relationships between law enforcement and the 18
community. 19
Many cities desire the ability to fundraise for equipment for firefighter and EMS services, libraries, 20
or special projects such as parks and trails. Authorizing cities to more broadly solicit and accept 21
charitable donations for projects in which there is broad community support would allow the 22
funding for desired projects without requiring an increase in property taxes or seeking a local 23
option sales tax. 24
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports amending Minn. Stat. § 471 to authorize 25
cities to solicit charitable donations for the purpose of projects that have generated 26
24
community interest such as parks, trails, and community centers or resources needed for city 1
services. 2
SD-18. Improving and Increasing Citizen Access to Information 3
Issue: State law requires that cities publish certain types of information in a “qualified” newspaper 4
designated by the city. While the requirements vary based on city population size, most cities must 5
publish ordinances before they can take effect; advertisements for bids; various financial reports; 6
meeting and hearing notices; notices of elections; dates for filing affidavits of candidacy; and 7
sample ballots. Collectively, these items are referred to as “official notices,” legal notices” and 8
“public notices” in state statute. 9
There are several requirements (Minn. Stat. § 331A.02) for a newspaper to be a “qualified” or 10
“official” newspaper for the city. For instance, there can only be one newspaper chosen for the 11
city; it must be printed in English in a newspaper format; if it is a daily newspaper, it must be 12
distributed at least five days each week; if not a daily paper, it may be distributed twice a month 13
with respect to the publishing of government public notices; it must be circulated in the city which 14
it purports to serve, and either have at least 400 copies regularly delivered to paying subscribers or 15
have at least 400 copies distributed without charge to local residents. For cities under 1,300 16
population, the delivery and distribution threshold is 250 copies. 17
As the newspaper industry has been challenged by alternative technologies, a growing number of 18
cities are unable to find a newspaper that meets the qualifications in state statute. In addition, as 19
technology has evolved, citizens have become more accustomed to the instantaneous availability 20
of online information. Because cities are committed to providing information to citizens and 21
responding to this demand, they have invested heavily in their websites and in growing a robust 22
online presence. They survey citizens about what method of communication is preferred and based 23
on this, cities update, reform, evolve, and advance communication tools and often, they do so with 24
limited means and resources to ensure citizens have access to information about their city. 25
Because of the publishing mandate outlined in state statute, cities continue to publish in 26
newspapers with limited resources while simultaneously providing information to citizens in the 27
format they actually demand online. These requirements originated in 1949 and to ensure the 28
25
original intent of the law – providing citizens access to their local government – it is time to 1
eliminate these outdated requirements and make communicating with citizens more efficient. 2
Response: The Legislature should eliminate outdated and unnecessary publication 3
requirements that are no longer relevant or representative of the technology we now have 4
that has significantly increased access to government. Cities should have the authority to: 5
a) Determine whether web publication should replace or supplement newspaper publication 6
based on the unique needs of each community. 7
b) Designate an appropriate publication that reaches the maximum number of citizens 8
possible. 9
c) Use alternative means of communication to fulfill statutory requirements such as city 10
newsletters, cable television, video streaming, e-mail, blogs and city websites. 11
d) Expand the use of summaries where information is technical or lengthy. 12
e) Publish and provide public access to local codes of ordinances on a website accessible to 13
the public and to post revisions and changes to city codes, resolutions, and rules on the 14
city website, when feasible. 15
SD-19. Administrative Fines for Code Violations 16
Issue: Many statutory and home rule charter cities have implemented administrative enforcement 17
programs for violations of local regulatory ordinances such as building codes, zoning codes, health 18
codes, and public nuisance ordinances. This use of administrative proceedings has kept 19
enforcement at the local level and reduced pressure on over-burdened district court systems. Cities 20
using administrative enforcement processes experience a lower cost of enforcement and a quicker 21
resolution to code violations. 22
Minnesota statutes expressly provide the authority for all cities to utilize administrative 23
enforcement of local codes and enforcement of liquor license and tobacco license violations. 24
26
In 2009, the Legislature amended Minn. Stat. ch. 169, the chapter of law pertaining to state traffic 1
regulations, to allow cities and counties to issue administrative citations for certain minor traffic 2
offenses. Since the passage of the 2009 administrative traffic citations law, some people have 3
questioned whether administrative citations for non-traffic, liquor, and tobacco license code 4
violations can be legally issued by statutory cities given that state law does not expressly provide 5
authority on other code matters. 6
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities continues to support the use of city administrative 7
fines for local regulatory ordinances, such as building codes, zoning codes, health codes, 8
public nuisance ordinances, and regulatory matters that are not duplicative of misdemeanor 9
or higher-level state traffic and criminal offenses. The Legislature should clarify that both 10
statutory and home rules charter cities have the authority to issue administrative citations 11
for code violations. Further, state statute should allow statutory and home rule charter cities 12
to adjudicate administrative citations and to assess a lien on properties for unpaid 13
administrative fines. 14
SD-20. Contracting and Purchasing 15
Issue: Minnesota statutes stipulate contracting and purchasing requirements for Minnesota cities. 16
The law prescribes the process political subdivisions must use to make purchases and award 17
contracts, and requires a competitive sealed bid procedure for contracts or purchases over 18
$175,000. The intent of these statutory requirements is to provide taxpayers with the best value for 19
their dollar and ensure integrity in the process. However, imposing these statutory requirements 20
may, at times, result in political subdivisions paying more for goods and services than private 21
entities under the same circumstances. 22
The Legislature recognized the benefits associated with alternative purchasing methods when it 23
amended municipal contracting law in 2004 to authorize the use of reverse auctions to purchase 24
supplies, materials, and equipment. Similarly, other contracting procedures, including “design-25
build” and direct negotiation are proven alternatives to the formal bidding process. Authorizing 26
broader use of these types of alternatives as the Legislature did in 2009 by authorizing a design-27
build pilot program, would enhance the ability of cities to make appropriate and fiscally 28
responsible purchasing decisions. 29
27
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports broader use of alternative contracting 1
and purchasing methods that streamline the process and reduce local purchasing costs. 2
Specifically, the League supports authorizing cities to use the design-build procedure and 3
providing municipalities with broader authority, similar to that of private businesses, to 4
directly negotiate contracts. The Legislature should establish a task force to review 5
municipal contracting laws, and consider contracting and purchasing reforms that give cities 6
the flexibility to provide quality goods and services at the lowest cost to taxpayers. 7
SD-21. City Enterprise Operations 8
Issue: Historically, city enterprise operations have been created in response to community needs, 9
lack of a private market, financial reporting requirements, state and federal mandates, to enforce 10
state and local law, and to ensure a quality of life for the residents of a community. Establishing an 11
enterprise operation allows a city to provide a desired service while maintaining financial control 12
over service levels, costs, and public inputs. 13
In some cases, enterprise operations produce general public benefits and may require public 14
support to ensure a desired level of service at a reasonable cost. The benefits of an enterprise 15
operation, therefore, should be evaluated not solely in terms of profitability but also on the service 16
benefits to citizens of the community. 17
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the local decisions made by cities to 18
deliver services by establishing a city enterprise operation. The state should refrain from 19
infringing on the ability of a city to provide services for its community. 20
SD-22. Preservation of Order in City Council Meetings 21
Issue: The Minnesota Supreme Court recently held a provision in Minn. Stat. § 609.72, subd. 1(2), 22
that prohibits disturbing public meetings was unconstitutionally broad. State v. Hensel, A15-0005 23
(Minn. 2017). Minn. Stat. § 412.191 gives statutory authority to city councils to preserve order and 24
regulate procedure at their meetings. Cities rarely relied on the struck-down statute, but instead 25
used other avenues to maintain order, such as issuing warnings and enforcing decorum rules. The 26
struck-down statute served as a last resort when other options did not work. 27
28
Response: The Legislature should ensure statutes adequately balance public participation 1
with the ability to effectively manage public meetings and protect public safety. 2
SD-23. Constitutional Amendments 3
Issue: The Minnesota Constitution requires that a constitutional amendment be approved by a 4
simple majority of both chambers of the Legislature at one session, and must then be ratified by a 5
majority of all the voters voting at the election. Minnesota is one of 18 states that require a simple 6
majority vote by legislators while 26 states require a higher threshold (17 states require a two-7
thirds majority and nine require a three-fifths majority). Since statehood, 215 proposed 8
constitutional amendments have been voted on by the electorate; 120 of them have been approved 9
(56%) and 95 rejected (44%). 10
Cities provide a variety of critical and essential services to residents of Minnesota. Many public 11
policy decisions at the state level impact cities and therefore, city officials depend on their state 12
legislators to represent city interests at the Legislature. 13
Additionally, unlike a statutory change, a constitutional amendment is difficult to modify or repeal 14
once enacted. 15
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities strongly supports our representational system of 16
government and opposes laws and amendments that restrict local government. The 17
Legislature is the appropriate governing body to consider and enact laws that reflect 18
statewide interests. Utilizing constitutional amendments to change public policy circumvents 19
this process. 20
Therefore, the League supports requiring a supermajority vote (two-thirds in support) by 21
the Legislature to put an amendment on the ballot. 22
SD-24. Initiative and Referendum 23
Issue: The Legislature has frequently considered legislation to establish initiative and referendum 24
by proposing to place a question for voter approval on the state general election ballot to amend 25
29
the state constitution to allow voters to initiate or repeal state laws by submitting a petition which 1
would cause such questions to be placed on the state general election ballot. 2
Response: Cities strongly support our representational system of governance and, therefore, 3
oppose amending the state constitution to provide for initiative and referendum. The 4
Legislature is the appropriate governing body to consider and enact public policy that 5
reflects statewide interests. 6
The process of adopting state law based on good public policy is best upheld and supported 7
by increasing the accountability and responsiveness of the legislative process, not by 8
circumventing it. Presenting complex issues to voters in the guise of direct democracy further 9
weakens representative government. 10
A state constitutional amendment to provide for initiative and referendum subjects cities and 11
their residents and taxpayers to the unintended outcomes of sometimes unwise attempts to 12
place significant public policy decisions into the hands of special interests that can raise 13
unlimited funds for the purpose of promoting their more narrow interests. 14
SD-25. Civil Liability of Local Governments 15
Issue: One of the barriers to the delivery of governmental services and programs is the exposure of 16
local governments and their officials to civil damage claims. The state has acted to protect itself 17
and its local governments by enacting exceptions and limitations to liability suits, and authorizing 18
self-insurance and other mechanisms to deal with claims allowed by law. 19
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports: 20
a) Creating an exception to municipal tort indemnification law, Minn. Stat. § 466.07, where 21
an employee is defended and indemnified for claims under a contract of insurance 22
carried by the employee. 23
b) Extending the protection of the state and municipal Tort Claims Act to quasi-24
governmental entities when performing public services such as firefighting or licensed 25
30
third-party ambulance providers that contract with a municipality to provide ambulance 1
services. 2
c) Existing constitutional safeguards for protecting public and private property interests 3
without any statutory expansion of property rights. 4
d) Clarifying and maintaining the applicability of municipal immunity in various areas, 5
including, but not limited to, vicarious official immunity and park and recreational 6
immunity, including the extension to entities providing a public service that have not 7
traditionally been included within the immunity (e.g., state trails over municipal utility 8
easements). 9
e) Preserving changes to Minnesota’s joint and several liability laws that require a 10
municipality to be at least 50 percent at fault to be held responsible for 100 percent of a 11
damage award. 12
f) Reasonable limits on the amount and circumstances in which statutory attorney fees may 13
be awarded in order to encourage settlement by all parties and decrease the likelihood of 14
litigation. 15
g) Preserving the essential structure of the local government tort liability caps in Minn. Stat. 16
§ 466.04. 17
SD-26. Private Property Rights and Takings 18
Issue: In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2005 decision, Kelo v. City of New London, 545 19
U.S. 469, which upheld the ability of local governments to use eminent domain for economic 20
development purposes, the Legislature enacted significant restrictions on cities’ use of eminent 21
domain for economic development and redevelopment, and imposed new compensation and 22
procedural requirements that apply to all condemnation actions, including those for traditional 23
public uses such as roads, parks, and schools. Legislation to control cities’ abilities to perform 24
regulatory acts—such as road rights-of-way condemnation, shooting range zoning, and 25
amortization—has also received strong support from legislators. In addition, some legislators 26
would like to authorize businesses to seek inverse condemnation when a governmental entity 27
31
enters the business market and provides competing goods or services or limits the number of 1
businesses that can operate privately or receive public contracts. 2
Such legislative initiatives threaten a wide array of planning, environmental, historic preservation, 3
and land conservation measures and undermine the fundamental responsibility of cities to protect 4
the public health, safety, and welfare of its citizens. 5
In 2006, the Legislature enacted Minn. Stat. § 117.031, a statute related to attorney fees in the 6
eminent domain process. The structure of the statute has resulted in attorney fee awards in eminent 7
domain actions that have no relationship to the outcome of the case, serve only to encourage 8
litigation, and shift limited public funding away from infrastructure projects. 9
Response: State law must continue to provide cities with the tools needed to balance the 10
rights of private property owners with the interests of the public. The League of Minnesota 11
Cities opposes legislation that diminishes the ability of cities to act in the best interest of the 12
health, safety, and welfare of its citizens; that increases the cost of doing business for the 13
public good; or that creates the possibility of additional lawsuits against cities. 14
Specifically, the League opposes legislation that: 15
a) Allows businesses to seek inverse condemnation when a city provides competing goods or 16
services, or limits the number of private operators. 17
b) Creates an automatic cause of action for damages any time a local regulatory action 18
impacts the use or reduces the value of private property. 19
The League supports legislation that: 20
a) Authorizes cities to use eminent domain for economic development and redevelopment 21
projects that advance a greater public good that benefits the community. 22
b) Empowers local elected officials to determine whether a particular taking of property 23
serves a public purpose. 24
32
c) Creates incentives to encourage landowners to voluntarily sell their property to the 1
public for development or redevelopment. 2
d) More appropriately balances awards of attorney fees and costs of litigation with the 3
outcome of the eminent domain proceeding. 4
SD-27. Organized Solid Waste Collection 5
Issue: “Organized collection” refers to a situation where a local unit of government, for any of a 6
variety of reasons, decides that there is a public interest served by limiting the number of solid 7
waste and recycling collection services available in the area. The reasons for implementing 8
organized collection can vary, but include: 9
a) Public safety concerns caused by the number and frequency of large trucks moving quickly 10
through residential neighborhoods; 11
b) Reducing wear on public infrastructure from heavy truck traffic; 12
c) Improving the efficiency, cost and quality of garbage and recycling service provided to local 13
residents; 14
d) Cooperating with other local governments to best meet solid waste management and recycling 15
objectives; 16
e) Taking local steps to reduce energy impacts of public services; and 17
f) Meeting the requirements of county ordinances and solid waste management plans as required 18
under Minn. Stat. § 115.94. 19
20
Organized collection is also encouraged in state solid waste policies as a means of improving the 21
efficiency and coordination of solid waste management between local units of government. There 22
are very specific and burdensome public procedures laid out in statute defining how such a 23
decision must be publicly vetted and approved and over what time period that can occur. 24
33
Despite all of these important and valid reasons for using organized collection, legislation has been 1
discussed in several recent sessions that would allow special takings claims or contractual damages 2
to be claimed by the solid waste industry if local governments make decisions that limit the 3
number of companies that can collect garbage in a community in a manner that prevents a 4
company currently operating in the community from continuing to do so through the 5
implementation of organized collection. The unspecified and ongoing liability this change would 6
create would have the effect of eliminating organized collection as a waste management option. 7
This change would also create a virtual monopoly situation for any company awarded a solid 8
waste contract under organized collection. The local unit of government would have to “buy out” a 9
contractor in the future to change providers, even if their services were no longer the lowest bid. It 10
also creates an incentive for bidders under organized collection to submit high bids, as they would 11
be eligible for damages if they fail to win without having to provide service. Furthermore, this is a 12
precedent that, if applied to other government purchasing and service contracting decisions, would 13
clearly run counter to the public purpose of government providing services at the lowest feasible 14
cost to taxpayers. 15
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities opposes efforts to apply inverse condemnation 16
claims to city solid waste contracting decisions or to allow automatic contractual damage 17
claims for solid waste haulers that lose competitive bids in organized collection communities. 18
Further, the League supports the current state policy that organized collection is a valuable 19
tool as part of a comprehensive solid waste and recycling management program and 20
recognizes the need to protect and preserve the authority of cities to adopt solid waste service 21
contracts that protect public safety, the environment and public infrastructure. 22
SD-28. Private Well Drilling 23
Issue: The state has continued to place requirements on public water supply providers to add 24
drinking water treatment and testing, to restrict the volume of water used, and to increase the cost 25
of water use through fees and requirements on utility rate structures. As a result, many water users 26
are choosing to obtain all or portions of their water from wells they place on their own property. 27
This creates risks to public health and safety, can affect the surrounding environment, can affect 28
34
city water supplies, and can leave city water utilities with massive losses of customer load and rate 1
revenue. 2
Providing clean, safe, cost-efficient drinking water to citizens is an essential service provided by 3
726 active municipal water systems. The Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) agrees that 4
cities have the statutory authority to determine whether private wells are an appropriate use within 5
their boundaries and that cities must protect the public water supplies from numerous private wells 6
in city boundaries. Private wells in a city increase the risk of contaminating public water supplies 7
and encourage over use of water. Cities have the authority to regulate and even prohibit private 8
wells by local ordinance. 9
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports current law that authorizes cities to 10
protect public health and safety through local controls regulating or prohibiting private 11
wells being placed within municipal water utility service boundaries and would oppose any 12
changes to law to remove that authority. 13
SD-29. Sustainable Development* 14
Issue: Minnesota cities spend significant time and resources planning for growth, development, 15
and redevelopment that will best serve the future needs of their residents. Numerous factors are 16
considered as part of that process, but an area of increasing interest involves concepts often 17
categorized as “sustainable development.” Minn. Stat. § 4A.07, subd. 1(b), defines this term, as it 18
pertains to local government, to mean “development that maintains or enhances economic 19
opportunity and community well-being while protecting and restoring the natural environment 20
upon which people and economies depend. Sustainable development meets the needs of the 21
present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” 22
Cities play a key role in fostering sustainable development and other conservation practices due to 23
their role in land use planning and zoning, stormwater and wastewater management, and local 24
economic development. Local governments can take a lead on these issues by choosing to 25
incorporate aspects of sustainable development into their local operations and facilities. They can 26
also develop local policies and regulations that support and guide individual and private 27
35
sustainability efforts. The ability of a city to affect these changes can, however, be restricted by 1
policies and requirements imposed by other levels of government. 2
Sustainable development initiatives can cover a wide range of issues, but share the benefit of 3
lessening the future environmental impacts of communities on the land, air, and water in their area. 4
Lakes, streams, rivers, wetlands, wildlife habitat, shoreland areas, and other natural resources can 5
be protected and enhanced in quality through local efforts. Energy efficiency and renewable 6
energy production reduce the energy demands of a community and the environmental impacts of 7
energy production. By more efficiently using public infrastructure and minimizing resource 8
consumption, the costs to individuals, business, and government can be reduced. New and 9
expanded business and job opportunities are also generated by the “green” products and services 10
needed to implement sustainable development initiatives. The ideal result of well-planned 11
sustainability, natural resources management, and conservation efforts is a city that is more 12
efficient in the use of its resources and infrastructure, creates fewer environmental problems for 13
future generations to address, and is a more desirable home for residents and businesses. 14
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports federal, state, and regional efforts to 15
promote sustainable development where the effectiveness of the proposed practice is 16
supported by sound science, and as long as those efforts do not supersede the authority of 17
local governments to determine their own policies regarding land use and related issues. 18
Providing technical assistance and financial incentives, and streamlining regulations to 19
encourage local governments and private property owners to engage in sustainable 20
development practices, as well as assisting in and providing education and information 21
efforts for to the building industry and the public, are the best means to generate successful 22
results. These programs should focus on outcomes, allowing flexibility in how to best meet 23
those outcomes in different locations and situations. The League opposes mandates that limit 24
the authority of cities to determine what practices will best meet the needs of their 25
communities. 26
The League supports sustainable development efforts that meet the above criteria, including 27
programs proposed in the following areas: 28
36
a) Shifting public resources, services, investments, purchasing power, and procurement 1
toward more economically and environmentally sustainable outcomes where those 2
solutions are cost effective and appropriate. 3
b) Using local land-use planning and zoning to protect and enhance limited natural 4
resources, and reduce the impacts of growth and development on local infrastructure. 5
c) Promoting efficient and renewable energy sources. 6
d) Encouraging sustainable building design, construction, and operation strategies focused 7
on integrated design, energy efficiency, water conservation, stormwater management, 8
waste reduction, pollution prevention, indoor environmental quality, and the use of low-9
impact building materials and products. 10
e) Supporting sustainable economic development, such as brownfield clean-up, on-site 11
stormwater management, and sustainable business practices and technologies. 12
f) Assisting and recognizing local governments that take actions to reduce greenhouse gas 13
emissions and increase energy efficiency by providing and identifying technical 14
assistance, financial assistance, and best practices. 15
SD-30. Advanced Energy Building Standards* 16
Issue: The State of Minnesota has made a strong statutory commitment to the reduction of carbon 17
emissions and greenhouse gases. As part of that effort, projects funded by the state must meet a set 18
of energy requirements called Sustainable Building 2030, or SB 2030. However, to meet state 19
energy efficiency goals, improvements in energy performance of buildings not financed by the 20
state will also be needed. 21
The State Building Code sets the standards that must be met in new or substantially retrofitted 22
structures and prohibits local requirements that differ from that code. The current state schedule 23
for the amendment and adoption of more stringent building and energy codes is not adequate to 24
result in the state meeting those goals. 25
37
Cities working on improving the energy performance of development within their communities 1
have identified a clear opportunity to establish cost-effective energy-efficiency performance 2
standards for new and substantially reconstructed commercial, industrial, and institutional 3
buildings that can significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions by lowering energy use in those 4
structures. 5
Two solutions have been proposed. One, referred to as an advanced energy building standard, 6
creates an optional tier of additional energy efficiency requirements for buildings in those 7
categories if they exceed a designated square footage. Such an addendum would be state-8
developed and cities could choose whether to apply it in their jurisdictions based on community 9
priorities, opportunity, and readiness. An advanced energy building standard would allow 10
municipalities to require more energy efficient buildings, reducing the energy burden for building 11
occupants and lowering overall greenhouse gas emissions. 12
A second would have the state adopt a universal advanced energy building standard within the 13
State Building Code. In either solution, having a uniform set of standards prevents confusion by 14
developers, designers, planners, and regulators, with people only needing to know if the 15
jurisdiction uses the requirements outlined in existing State Building Code or has adopted the 16
added energy section. 17
Discussions with developers, architects, engineers, city staff, energy efficiency experts, utility 18
interests, labor, state agencies, academia, and other stakeholders have examined approaches the 19
state could use to create and allow an advanced energy building standard. While several different 20
versions could work, it is clear that Minnesota needs to change its approach in order to meet state 21
energy efficiency goals. 22
Response: The legislature should require the Department of Labor and Industry to either 23
establish an advanced energy building standard beyond the base statewide commercial code 24
for the construction, reconstruction, and alteration of public and private commercial and 25
multifamily residential buildings that exceed a certain square footage as an appendix of the 26
State Building Code, or should adopt the advanced energy standard as part of the State 27
Building Code. 28
38
These standards should conform to timelines and performance measures that result in net 1
zero carbon emissions by 2036 or sooner and should be updated every three to five years. If it 2
is an appendix, cities should be provided the authority to adopt the advanced energy 3
standard by ordinance at their discretion, making it an official addendum to the baseline 4
energy code in any jurisdiction adopting them. 5
The League recognizes the benefits of a consistent state code and supports a requirement 6
that a local jurisdiction adopting the standards in the appendix may not amend them but 7
may specify the minimum size structure to which they apply, as long as it is 10,000 or more 8
square feet. 9
SD-31. Construction Codes* 10
Issue: The State Building Code (SBC) is the statewide standard for the construction, 11
reconstruction, alteration, and repair of the buildings and other structures of the type governed by 12
the code. A building code provides many benefits, including uniformity of construction standards 13
in the building industry, consistency in code interpretation and enforcement, and life-safety 14
guidance. Since 2018, the state will adopt a new version of the SBC every six years after a 15
rulemaking process that allows for significant public input. The League supports adopting and 16
amending the SBC through the rulemaking process, and opposes legislative changes to the 17
building codes absent unusual or extraordinary circumstances. 18
While all cities must enforce certain codes—such as the accessibility code and the bleacher safety 19
code—enforcement of the SBC remains a local option for cities outside of the seven-county 20
metropolitan area with fewer than 2,500 people that did not adopt the code before Jan. 1, 2008. 21
Requiring enforcement of the SBC by smaller cities in Greater Minnesota is cost-prohibitive for 22
many cities, and would result in an unfunded mandated. 23
While a single set of coordinated codes helps provide consistency in code administration and 24
enforcement, implementation of sustainable building design, construction, and operation does not 25
readily integrate with the existing state building and energy code system. As a result, many cities 26
are interested in adopting an advanced energy building standard beyond the base statewide 27
commercial code for the construction, reconstruction, and alteration of public and private 28
39
commercial buildings. An advanced energy building standard would allow municipalities to 1
require more energy efficient buildings, reducing the energy burden for building occupants and 2
lowering overall greenhouse gas emissions. 3
Response: A statewide-enforced building code may have benefits, but requiring it would 4
result in an unfunded mandate. 5
Enforcing the State Building Code should remain a local option for the municipalities that 6
have not already adopted the Code, unless the state fully funds the costs of enforcement and 7
inspection services necessary to enforce a statewide building code. If the Legislature requires 8
all cities to enforce the State Building Code, local governments must have the option to hire 9
or select a building official of their choice and set the appropriate level of service—even if the 10
state fully funds code enforcement activities. 11
The state should collaborate with local governments, construction industry representatives, 12
and other stakeholders to review the building and energy codes and consider modifications 13
to encourage sustainable building design, construction, and operation. 14
Specifically: 15
a) For purposes of federal conformity, the state should adopt the International Energy 16
Conservation Code as part of the State Building Code. 17
b) The Legislature should authorize cities to voluntarily adopt a uniform advanced energy 18
building standard with stronger local standards for development and conservation that 19
will help inform the baseline state code development process. 20
SD-32. Building Officials 21
Issue: There is a shortage of certified building officials in Minnesota. This shortage is particularly 22
acute in Greater Minnesota where some cities have trouble finding certified building officials to 23
perform inspections required by state law. Minnesota needs to hire a new generation of certified 24
building officials and must ensure that current officials have adequate training and opportunity to 25
inspect a wide range of projects. In light of emerging technologies and offsite building methods 26
40
such as panelization and modular construction, it is important that certified building officials have 1
training opportunities that address inspection processes for new trends in homebuilding. 2
The Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) has authority over state-licensed facilities and public 3
buildings. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 326B.106, subd. 2, it must delegate authority to inspect 4
projects on these buildings to a municipality if DLI determines that the municipality has adequate 5
qualified local building officials to perform plan review or inspection of the projects. In 2014 the 6
Legislature passed legislation requested by the League of Minnesota Cities and agreed to by DLI 7
to provide more transparency and clarity to the delegation process. DLI, after consulting local 8
governments and the League, implemented a new delegation procedure as required by statute. 9
Although the new delegation process is a significant improvement, it can still be difficult for local 10
building officials to achieve the experience necessary to be delegated full inspection authority. 11
Response: Minnesota’s housing and construction industries depend on the work of local 12
building officials, and cities that enforce the State Building Code endeavor to provide quality 13
code administration and enforcement. The State must increase its efforts to train new 14
building officials and must provide sufficient education to help local officials efficiently 15
administer and enforce construction regulations to protect the health and safety of citizens. 16
These education efforts should include training to assist local building officials gain the 17
requisite experience to qualify for delegation of state-licensed facilities and public buildings. 18
The Legislature should encourage the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry to 19
provide training opportunities to ensure certified building officials across the state have the 20
skills and expertise to provide onsite inspections of buildings constructed by new building 21
methods such as panelization and modular construction. 22
The League urges the state to make surplus revenue from the building permit surcharge 23
available to local governments to help defray the cost of complying with code official training 24
and education requirements. 25
SD-33. Disability Access Requirements 26
Issue: Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 requires that state and local 27
governments provide people with disabilities equal opportunity to benefit from all of their 28
41
programs, services, and activities. Public entities are not required to take actions that would result 1
in significant financial and administrative burdens, but they must modify policies, practices, and 2
procedures to avoid discrimination unless they can demonstrate that doing so would fundamentally 3
alter the nature of the service, program, or activity being provided. 4
State and local governments are also required to follow specific standards when constructing new 5
facilities and altering existing public buildings, and they must relocate programs or otherwise 6
provide access in inaccessible older buildings. Under the ADA, public entities are not necessarily 7
required to make each existing facility accessible. However, their programs—when viewed in their 8
entirety—must be readily accessible to people with disabilities. A public entity may achieve 9
program accessibility through various methods. For example, a city may alter existing facilities, 10
acquire or construct new facilities, relocate a service or program to an accessible facility, or 11
provide services at other accessible sites. 12
One district court judge has taken an expansive view of disability access requirements for public 13
recreation facilities. The case involved a parent who sued a city due to difficulty viewing soccer 14
and baseball games on certain city fields. The court, in interpreting the Minnesota Human Rights 15
Act (MHRA), held that any public facility is a public service. Since the MHRA requires that every 16
public service be accessible to disabled persons, the court concluded that each and every playing 17
field and other public facility must be fully accessible. The court rejected the ADA’s limitations on 18
modifications for physical access to older facilities, as well as the ADA’s “when viewed in its 19
entirety” language for program access. The result is a more restrictive state standard for physical 20
access to public facilities than required by the ADA and the State Building Code. 21
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports changes to the MHRA that will make 22
state accessibility standards compatible with the federal ADA for public services and 23
facilities. The Legislature should clarify that a facility that is in compliance with Accessibility 24
Code provisions of the State Building Code meets the physical access requirements of the 25
MHRA. State law should also specify that accessibility requirements apply to public 26
programs and services as a whole, rather than to each individual aspect of a public program 27
or service. 28
42
SD-34. Assaults on Code Enforcement Officials 1
Issue: Many city employees and contractors are required to enforce city codes and ordinances and 2
state statutes and rules as part of their job duties. Code enforcement can involve denying a building 3
permit, ordering a landlord to make repairs to rental properties, or fining property owners for 4
failing to abate a nuisance. Because of the nature of their job, code enforcement officials can be 5
subjected to verbal assaults, threats, and physical violence. 6
Minnesota law recognizes the need to protect certain employees whose jobs make it more likely 7
that they will be the target of assaults by escalating assault charges from fifth to fourth degree for 8
the assaults of peace officers, firefighters, school officials, and “public employees with mandated 9
duties”. Minn. Stat. § 609.2231, subd. 6, specifically defines “public employees with mandated 10
duties” as agricultural inspectors, occupational safety and health inspectors, child protection 11
workers, public health nurses, animal control officers, and probation or parole officers. An assault 12
on one of these employees who is engaged in the performance of a duty mandated by law, court 13
order, or ordinance, is a gross misdemeanor if the person knows the employee is engaged in the 14
performance of official duties and inflicts demonstrable bodily harm. 15
Under current law, an assault on a code enforcement official not enumerated in Minn. Stat. § 16
609.2231, subd. 6, while performing official business can only be charged as fifth degree assault, a 17
misdemeanor, unless it results in substantial bodily harm. All code enforcement officials should be 18
afforded the same protections under Minnesota Statutes, and the legislature should amend the 19
statute to expand the employees covered by the statute. 20
Response: The legislature should expand Minn. Stat. § 609.2231, subd. 6, to include code 21
enforcement officials. The term code enforcement official should be defined broadly to 22
include public employees and contractors whose jobs require them to enforce all 23
administrative codes, rules, ordinances, and state laws. 24
SD-35. Restrictions on Possession of Firearms 25
Issue: The Minnesota Citizens Personal Protection Act, also known as “conceal-and-carry,” 26
prohibits guns on most school properties but forbids other local units of government from 27
43
prohibiting loaded firearms on their properties. The inconsistencies in the law’s treatment of 1
different kinds of properties have caused confusion about how the law applies to multi-use 2
facilities, such as municipal ice arenas used for school-sponsored programs. 3
Further, the law gives private property owners the right to prohibit guns in their establishments, 4
but prohibits landowners from restricting firearm possession by tenants and their guests without 5
distinguishing between residential and commercial properties. This creates confusion for shopping 6
malls and other retail properties with large common areas that are not occupied by the tenants but 7
which the tenants and their customers must cross to access the tenant’s space. 8
Finally, the Citizens Personal Protection Act does not explicitly state the type of firearm a permit 9
holder may carry, and this has led to ambiguity regarding whether the law is limited to the right to 10
carry a pistol-length firearm in public or if it allows for any firearm, including a military-style 11
assault rifle. 12
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities requests an amendment to the Citizens Personal 13
Protection Act that would allow cities to prohibit firearms in city-owned buildings, facilities, 14
and parks. The League supports clarifying the Act to state that a permit holder, under the 15
terms of a permit, is allowed to carry a pistol-length firearm, but not a semiautomatic 16
military-style assault weapon. The League is not seeking a repeal of the Citizens Personal 17
Protection Act, nor authority to prohibit legal weapons in parking lots or on city streets and 18
sidewalks. The League also supports efforts by commercial property owners to clarify that 19
the prohibition on restricting possession by tenants and their guests applies only to 20
residential rental property. 21
SD-36. Public Safety Communications 22
Issue: The state role in financing public safety communications has important cost implications for 23
cities. The state needs to accept financial responsibility for use by cities of the state public safety 24
radio communications backbone. Cities have struggled to pay high expenses to participate in the 25
800 MHz statewide public safety system. 26
44
In previous state budgets, the Legislature turned to revenue sources upon which cities depend to 1
cover costs to purchase and operate new communications technology and hardware for computer-2
aided dispatch, 911 public safety answering points (PSAPs), and interoperable radio 3
communications equipment and subsystems in order to finance the build-out of the state backbone 4
for the new system. As a result, fees were directed to fund revenue bond debt service used to 5
complete the statewide build-out of the Allied Radio Matrix for Emergency Response (ARMER) 6
and the cost of operations of the state public safety radio communications backbone. 7
At the federal level, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has ordered reservation of 8
700 MHz wireless spectrum for a national interoperable broadband network to meet public safety 9
communications needs. FirstNet was established in 2012 as an independent authority within the 10
National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and is responsible for 11
constructing a nationwide high-speed public safety wireless broadband network. 12
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports continued and increased state financing 13
of substantial local costs to participate in ARMER, including the acquisition and 14
modernization of subscriber equipment, such as portable and mobile radios required for 15
ARMER users. The League also opposes efforts to divert dedicated ARMER funds to the 16
state’s general fund. The Legislature should fund regional cooperation and partnerships for 17
effective delivery of 911 service, training and use of ARMER. 18
The League also urges the FCC to continue to support availability of wireless spectrum 19
necessary to expand channel capacity that allows local public safety agencies to meet future 20
needs of cities and other local units of government. 21
SD-37. Collateral Consequences and Expungements* 22
Issue: Collateral consequences of criminal records haves been discussed at the federal and state 23
levels for many years. Collateral consequences are adverse impacts on housing, employment, 24
professional licensure, immigration, etc. They can impact successful reentry and rehabilitation of 25
offenders. 26
45
In 2023, legislation was enacted that requires automatic expungement of certain records from a 1
person’s criminal history, replacing the existing requirement that a person petition the court for an 2
order expunging the record. These automatic expungement provisions go into effect Jan. 1, 2025. 3
Offenses that are considered violent or otherwise not subject to automatic expungement in the new 4
law will still require a petition and court order. 5
Additionally, 2023 legislation requires automatic expungement of certain cannabis-related records. 6
Eligible felony level cannabis-related records will be reviewed by a Cannabis Expungement Board 7
to determine whether the records meet the criteria identified for expungement. The cannabis law 8
went into effect Aug. 1, 2023, and cannabis-related expungements are expected to be implemented 9
mid-2024. 10
Current law allows for the expungement of criminal records, which is an extraordinary remedy 11
because it involves the competing interests of individuals who want to remove the stigma of an 12
arrest or conviction when pursuing things such as employment and housing and the public’s 13
interest in maintaining criminal histories for future criminal investigations and making hiring, 14
rental, and other decisions about individuals. 15
Expungements are not granted unless the court determines that the benefits to the individual 16
outweigh the disadvantages to the public and public safety. When the court is making this 17
determination, it must take into consideration the following factors: 18
a) The nature and severity of the underlying crime; 19
b) The risk, if any, the person poses to individuals or society; 20
c) The length of time since the crime occurred; 21
d) The steps taken by the person toward rehabilitation; 22
e) Aggravating or mitigating factors relating to the underlying crime; 23
f) The reasons for expungement, including attempts to obtain employment housing or other 24
necessities; 25
46
g) The criminal record; 1
h) The record of employment and community involvement; 2
i) The recommendations of law enforcement, prosecutors, and corrections; 3
j) The recommendations of victims or whether victims of the underlying crime were minors; 4
k) Outstanding restitution obligations to victims; and 5
l) Any other relevant factors. 6
This balancing test is essential to ensure competing interests are adequately considered. 7
Recently, the state legislature has discussed whether to authorize automatic expungements in 8
certain situations. Cities understand the impact of collateral consequences but have concerns with 9
automatically expunging criminal records. While expungements play an important role, automatic 10
expungements should adequately balance the interests of the individual seeking expungement and 11
the interests of the public and public safety. For example, demonstration of steps taken towards 12
rehabilitation are essential so using only a short time factor is insufficient to show true 13
rehabilitation. 14
Response: The League supports legislation addressing the collateral consequences of criminal 15
records in a balanced manner that helps rehabilitated individuals succeed and ensures public 16
safety and victim interests are met. The League is also in support of legislation and policies 17
that help provide individuals with proper notice of the options and the process for 18
expungements that exist in current law. 19
The League opposes legislation that does not adequately address the important statutory 20
factors that must be considered under current expungement law. The interests of 21
rehabilitated individuals seeking expungement to live without the stigma of an arrest or 22
conviction record should be balanced with the public’s interest in maintaining criminal 23
histories for future criminal investigations and to make safe hiring, rental, and other 24
decisions about individuals. The current statutory scheme provides that balance, and thus, 25
any future legislation should also take the factors into account. Safeguards must include 26
47
notification and involvement of victims.The state should monitor the impacts of changes 1
enacted in 2023 to expungement laws and the legislature should make changes as necessary 2
to balance the benefit to individuals in providing automatic expungements and the interests 3
of the public and public safety. 4
SD-38. Criminal and Juvenile Justice Information 5
Issue: Criminal justice information integration is about getting the right information into the hands 6
of the right people at the right time and in the right place to make key decisions throughout the 7
criminal justice process. The integration of criminal justice information remains complex and 8
multifaceted. It takes time and resources from all levels of government. Public safety is 9
compromised when there is a lack of centralized, complete, and accurate criminal history data 10
about individuals, incidents, and cases. 11
City officials are aware of the complex issues raised by the utilization of electronic record keeping, 12
data sharing, and access to records that identify data subjects. The League of Minnesota Cities 13
recognizes that one of the ongoing challenges with the integration of criminal and juvenile justice 14
information is meeting the requirements of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act 15
(MGDPA). 16
More than 500 cities operate police departments. These departments vary dramatically in fiscal 17
capacity, staffing resources, and technical expertise. Further, each municipal law enforcement 18
agency has unique operating procedures, strengths, and needs based on the community it serves. 19
The League knows the integration and security access to criminal and juvenile justice information 20
systems has a significant impact on municipal police business practices. 21
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports continued efforts by the state to 22
integrate and make available criminal justice information systems. This includes efforts in 23
key areas of funding, data practices, collaborative relationships, balancing privacy and 24
public safety, and addressing aging systems. The League also supports the Criminal and 25
Juvenile Justice Information Advisory Group, cooperation among legislators, law 26
enforcement, corrections agents, court officials, prosecutors, community groups, and 27
businesses that build public support for criminal justice systems. 28
48
To ensure compliance with the MGDPA, comprehensive guidelines and operational practices 1
should be implemented to safeguard access to and use of criminal and juvenile justice data. 2
However, data practices policies should not create new, unfunded mandates for local units of 3
government or compromise the usefulness of criminal and juvenile justice systems by 4
creating unnecessary barriers. 5
SD-39. Pawn Shop Regulation and Use of the Automated Property System 6
(APS) 7
Issue: Minn. Stat. ch. 325J enables licensure for pawnbrokers and provides statewide minimum 8
regulations for the pawn industry. 9
Specifically, the law: 10
a) Requires pawnbrokers to record all transactions, including details of the item pawned or sold, 11
information about the customer and the cost of the transaction. 12
b) Requires pawnbrokers to maintain records of all transactions for three years, and to make 13
records available upon request to law enforcement agencies. 14
c) Allows pawnbrokers to charge a maximum monthly interest rate of 3 percent of the principal 15
amount loaned in a transaction, plus a reasonable fee for storage and services. 16
The Automated Property System (APS) is a computerized system for tracking and monitoring 17
pawn transactions. The purpose of the APS is to provide a tool to verify compliance with Minn. 18
Stat. ch. 325J, to help identify and minimize illegal activity, to recover stolen property, and to 19
provide a legitimate environment for consumers. Currently, almost 260 law enforcement agencies 20
and over 190 stores in Minnesota and Wisconsin participate in the APS system as either a “query 21
only” or “contributing” member. 22
All access to and use of information in the APS system is governed by the Minnesota Data 23
Practices Act. Only authorized users have access to the data. There is no public access to the data. 24
Further, data that would reveal the identity of persons who are customers of a licensed pawnbroker 25
or secondhand goods dealer are private data on individuals and only used for law enforcement 26
49
purposes. Data describing the property in a regulated transaction with a licensed pawnbroker or 1
secondhand goods dealer is public. 2
Original pawn and secondhand transactions reported to the APS carry a $1 fee, regardless of the 3
number of items involved. All subsequent updates or corrections to transactions are processed 4
without charge. Contributing jurisdictions may also add regulatory costs to the transaction fee. The 5
total transaction fee is then typically assessed by the dealer to the customer. 6
A bill that would weaken Minn. Stat. ch. 325J and restrict the use of the APS has been introduced 7
in the Minnesota Legislature. Specifically, the legislation would forbid law enforcement agents 8
from acquiring customer information from pawn and secondhand shops until they have probable 9
cause to do so, and would eliminate the authority of local units of government to more strictly 10
regulate pawn and secondhand dealers. 11
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the authority of cities to regulate and 12
license pawnbrokers, and opposes any legislation that would remove the authority of local 13
governments to enact more restrictive regulations than currently exist in Minn. Stat. ch. 14
325J. 15
The League supports the authority of cities to set licensing and transaction fees that enable 16
them to recover their full regulatory and enforcement expenses. 17
The League supports cooperation between law enforcement agencies and the pawn industry 18
that enhances the ability to identify illegal activity and recover stolen property. Access to 19
transaction information by law enforcement agencies is vital to accomplishing this goal. 20
Further, the sharing of information through the use of the APS is a proactive way to prevent 21
property and other crimes. 22
SD-40. City Costs for Enforcing State and Local Laws 23
Issue: Cities experience substantial costs enforcing state and local laws, particularly those related 24
to traffic, controlled substances, and incarceration of prisoners. The current method in our criminal 25
justice system of recovering costs for law enforcement and prosecution through fines is 26
insufficient to meet the costs incurred by local governments. Further, when a violator requests 27
50
relief from paying the full amount of the fine and surcharge, the courts have been more inclined to 1
waive the fine than to reduce the surcharge. When this occurs, the local units of government 2
recover no costs even though the city has incurred expenses. 3
Response: The Legislature should review this issue and adopt measures that provide for 4
complete reimbursement of the costs incurred by local governments in enforcing state and 5
local laws. Solutions that should be considered include: 6
a) Increasing fine amounts. 7
b) Removing or modifying county and state surcharges that conflict with cost recovery 8
principles. 9
c) Requiring the courts to consider ordering restitution from the defendant to reimburse the 10
costs of enforcement and prosecution as part of any sentence. 11
d) Requiring that if a court reduces the amount paid by a violator, any reduction should be 12
made from the surcharge and not the fine. 13
SD-41. Compensation and Reimbursement for Public Safety Services 14
Issue: Municipal public safety personnel often respond to emergencies involving non-residents. 15
For example, municipal fire, police, and/or ambulance services may be dispatched to the scene of a 16
traffic accident on an interstate highway involving victims from other cities or states. Although 17
cities can bill for some public safety services they provide to non-residents, they have limited 18
authority to collect on unpaid bills. 19
Cities have also found that auto insurance policies vary when it comes to coverage for emergency 20
responses. Insurance companies of those responsible for accidents sometimes deny payment for 21
fire service. 22
Additionally, municipal public safety personnel commonly respond to emergencies that require the 23
provision of medical services. The medical services provided by the city-employed first responders 24
are part of a continuum of health care that is covered by insurance companies when provided by 25
paramedics and other medical care providers; however, insurance policies vary when it comes to 26
51
coverage for municipally provided medical services. Insurance companies of those treated by 1
municipal public safety personnel frequently deny payment for emergency medical services when 2
they are billed by a municipality. 3
Thus, when a municipal public safety agency provides first response medical assistance, they 4
commonly do so at the expense of local property taxpayers. 5
Response: While emergency medical responses are legitimate functions of municipal public 6
safety departments, the costs of providing emergency medical care to individuals should be 7
covered by insurance and not be borne exclusively by the community’s taxpayers. Cities 8
should have the authority to bill for the full cost of first responder medical services they 9
provide and to collect on unpaid bills. Insurance companies should be required to reimburse 10
local governments for the full cost of providing these emergency medical services. Finally, 11
auto and homeowner’s insurance policies should be required to insure for the cost of 12
emergency responses. 13
SD-42. Administrative Traffic Citations 14
Issue: Cities have implemented administrative enforcement programs for violations of local 15
regulatory ordinances, such as building codes, zoning codes, health codes, and public nuisance 16
ordinances. This use of administrative proceedings has kept enforcement at the local level and 17
reduced pressure on over-burdened district court systems. 18
The Legislature has repeatedly increased the fine surcharge on district court cases to generate 19
revenues for the state’s general fund. The surcharge—the amount paid over and above the fine—is 20
now $75 per citation. The growth in the surcharge has dramatically increased the cost of citations 21
and has caused some to question whether the total of the fine and surcharge is disproportionate for 22
minor matters. To lower the amount imposed on their residents, a number of cities have expanded 23
their administrative programs to include some offenses traditionally heard in district court, such as 24
minor traffic offenses. 25
The increased state surcharges have not been used to assist local units of government with the 26
growing costs of enforcement and prosecution. No matter which entity—city, county or state—27
52
issues a statutory citation, the violator pays between $115 and $127 for a minor speeding violation. 1
Of this amount, the city receives between $13 and $20, and the county receives just slightly more. 2
Further, when a violator requests relief from paying the full amount of the fine and surcharge, the 3
courts have been more inclined to waive the fine than to reduce the surcharge. When this occurs, 4
the local units of government recover no costs even though the city has incurred expenses. 5
In 2009, the Legislature amended the statutes to allow administrative fines to be issued for certain 6
minor traffic offenses. Cities report that the short list of offenses noted in that law change does not 7
adequately address the needs of local law enforcement. Additional authority is necessary to allow 8
law enforcement officers to implement an effective program to reduce violations. 9
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities continues to support the use of city administrative 10
fines for local regulatory ordinances, such as building codes, zoning codes, health codes, 11
public nuisance ordinances and regulatory matters that are not duplicative of misdemeanor 12
or higher level state traffic and criminal offenses. Cities should have the authority to issue 13
administrative citations for low-level moving and equipment violations that: 1) would 14
otherwise result in warnings, and 2) occur on roadways where the speed limit is 45 miles per 15
hour or less. 16
If state leaders choose not to expand the list of administrative traffic offenses, they should 17
then change the distribution of statutory violation fine revenues so that cities are adequately 18
compensated for enforcement and prosecution costs. 19
SD-43. Juveniles in Municipal Jails 20
Issue: Municipal jails have long served as holding facilities for suspects who are being questioned 21
and/or booked, and for those awaiting transfer to a county jail or juvenile detention facility. In 22
2012, the Minnesota Department of Corrections (DOC) issued a reinterpretation of an existing law 23
to say that, “[W]here counties have secure juvenile correctional facilities…juveniles are not 24
allowed to be held in jail and/or municipal lock-ups for any length of time.” 25
This interpretation is in conflict with a provision in Minn. Stat. § 260B.181, subd. 4, which 26
provides that juveniles can be held in a licensed juvenile facility for up to six hours. Many 27
53
municipal jails, including those in counties where juvenile detention facilities exist, have been 1
operating under the six-hour holding law. 2
Managers of municipal jails indicate the reinterpretation of the law is contrary to common practice 3
and presents significant challenges for municipal law enforcement personnel. 4
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports a statutory clarification that would allow 5
juveniles to be held for questioning and booking in licensed jail facilities for up to six hours, 6
regardless of whether the county has a juvenile detention facility. 7
SD-44. Justice System Funding 8
Issue: Over the past several years, Minnesota’s justice system has operated under consecutive 9
budget shortfalls. Public service windows are closed part of each week in many courthouses. 10
Delays in case filings, hearings and dispositions are building throughout the state as staff and 11
judges struggle to keep up with caseloads. The budget shortfalls limit the ability of the courts to 12
process cases pertaining to shoplifting, trespassing, worthless checks, traffic and ordinance 13
violations, juvenile truancy, runaways and underage drinking, consumer credit disputes, property-14
related and small civil claims, and many other cases. Timely processing of these cases is critical to 15
keeping communities safe and to preserving the quality of life residents expect. 16
The State Court Administrator has advocated for statutory changes that have resulted in 17
efficiencies and cost savings while preserving core services. These changes involve consolidating 18
services where practicable and using technology to reduce costs. They include centralized payable 19
processing, use of e-citations and restructuring of state mandated programs. 20
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports a statement by former Chief Justice Eric 21
J. Magnuson that calls for “an adequately funded, functioning justice system that resolves 22
disputes promptly in order to ensure the rule of law, protect public safety and individual 23
rights and promote a civil society.” The League supports the use of technology to reduce 24
costs and preserve services. The League opposes any changes that would decriminalize local 25
ordinances, petty misdemeanors or misdemeanor offenses, or that would make prosecution 26
of these crimes more difficult. 27
54
SD-45. 21st Century Policing 1
Issue: Published in May 2015, the President's Task Force on 21st Century Policing Report makes 2
multiple recommendations aimed at helping law enforcement agencies and communities 3
strengthen trust and collaboration, while reducing crime by implementing the next phase of 4
community-focused policing. The report contains recommendations related to six key areas of law 5
enforcement: 6
a) Building Trust and Legitimacy; 7
b) Policy and Oversight; 8
c) Technology and Social Media; 9
d) Community Policing and Crime Reduction; 10
e) Training and Education; and 11
f) Officer Safety and Wellness. 12
Many Minnesota communities have embraced 21st Century Policing concepts, and municipal 13
police departments throughout the state have adopted policies that align with 21st Century Policing 14
principles. The Legislature and governor made progress toward advancing 21st Century Policing 15
principles statewide by enacting the 2020 Police Accountability Act. 16
In Minnesota, police chiefs have indicated strong interest in securing additional training in 21st 17
Century Policing practices for officers. Demand for training has increased in recent years, and in 18
2017 the Legislature responded by increasing continuing education requirements for officers, 19
expanding the scope of this training to include more community policing, and by providing $6 20
million per year for training reimbursement provided by the Peace Officer Standards and Training 21
(POST) Board. This funding is not permanent and sunsets in 2024. 22
The POST Board is funded through a special revenue account from a surcharge on criminal and 23
traffic convictions. However, a significant amount of the special revenues collected are diverted to 24
the state’s general fund and are not made available for training reimbursement, and the amount of 25
55
the surcharge paid to the state has been declining. There is also growing concern about the impact 1
of the surcharge on residents, particularly those of low income and persons of color, and concern 2
about funding policy training based on ticket revenue. 3
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities recognizes the need for communities and law 4
enforcement agencies to strengthen trust and collaboration, while continuing to reduce 5
crime. The League supports the recommendations of the President’s Task Force on 21st 6
Century Policing Report as well as the training, policy and accountability provisions 7
contained in the 2020 Police Accountability Act. To that end, the League supports: 8
a) POST Board model policies that align with the recommendations of the President’s Task 9
Force on 21st Century Policing Report and the 2020 Police Accountability Act; 10
b) POST Board approved training opportunities for new recruits and in-service peace 11
officers that include but are not limited to procedural justice, bias/implicit bias and 12
cultural awareness, de-escalation, and crisis intervention training; 13
c) Increased state and federal funding for peace officer training that includes 14
reimbursement for tuition, travel, time and backfilling the shifts of officers who are out 15
for training; 16
d) Permanent funding for police training that is not based on criminal and traffic ticket 17
revenue; 18
e) State and federal funding for peace officer safety and wellness initiatives; 19
f) State policies, training and funding that support co-responder programs to enhance the 20
safety and effectiveness of responses involving people with mental illnesses; 21
g) State policies, training and funding that support non-traditional community based public 22
safety programs; and 23
h) Authority and grants for municipal police departments to deploy technologies such as 24
dash cameras and police body worn cameras that enhance both criminal justice and 25
officer accountability. 26
56
SD-46. Post-Incarceration Living Facilities 1
Issue: Sufficient funding and oversight is needed to ensure that residents living in post-2
incarceration living facilities have appropriate care and supervision, and that neighborhoods are 3
not disproportionately impacted by high concentrations of these types of facilities. Under current 4
law, operators of certain post-incarceration living facilities are not required to notify cities when 5
they intend to purchase single family housing for these purposes. Cities do not have authority to 6
regulate the locations of post-incarceration living facilities. Cities have reasonable concerns about 7
the safety of facility residents and neighborhoods, particularly in cases of public safety. Cities also 8
have an interest in preserving a balance in residential neighborhoods between this type of facilities 9
and other uses. It is in the best interest of providers to inform and work with cities before opening 10
a facility in order to educate providers of community standards and expectations. 11
Response: Cities should have statutory authority to require agencies, as well as licensed and 12
registered providers, that operate post-incarceration living facilities to notify the city before 13
properties are operated. Cities should be provided with the necessary contact information 14
once licensed or registered. Providers applying to operate post-incarceration living facilities 15
should be required to contact the city to be informed of applicable local regulations. The 16
Legislature should also require establishment of non-concentration standards for post-17
incarceration living facilities to prevent clustering. Finally, licensing or registering 18
authorities must be responsible for removing any residents incapable of living in such an 19
environment, particularly if they become a danger to themselves or others. 20
SD-47. Homeland Security Costs and Liability* 21
Issue: The federal government’s response to terrorism has resulted in new responsibilities for local 22
governments in a number of areas. For example, shortly after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 23
2001, the federal government tapped local law enforcement personnel to provide security and 24
perform screening at our nation’s airports. These new responsibilities increase cities’ liability 25
exposure and result in higher local costs for public safety services. In addition, local governments 26
are expected to continue emergency planning and capacity building efforts, provide additional 27
57
training and equipment for first responders, and improve emergency response coordination and 1
communication. 2
As partners in protecting our country from terrorism, the federal government must: 1) provide 3
greater direct financial support for our first responders; 2) maintain funding for general pre- and 4
post-disaster emergency management programs; 3) ensure a coordinated and effective national 5
emergency response system; and 4) address issues of cyber security that threaten public safety, 6
services, and infrastructure. 7
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities recommends that when the federal government 8
requires or contracts for cities’ assistance in meeting federal homeland security 9
responsibilities, the federal government should fully cover the costs, including the risk of 10
liability arising from these activities. 11
The League supports greater federal funding to prepare, train, and equip our first 12
responders. The League also supports changes in the federal funding process to ensure 13
Department of Homeland Security funds move quickly to the local level. Furthermore, the 14
League supports the allocation of state resources to provide training and technical assistance 15
to local governments related to the prevention and control of cyber security risks to critical 16
infrastructure. 17
SD-48. Cybersecurity* 18
Issue: Dating back to at least 2012, U.S. Defense Secretaries have warned that the United States 19
are increasingly vulnerable to foreign computer hackers who could dismantle the nation’s power 20
grid, transportation system, financial networks and government. On a state level, the Governor’s 21
Task Force on Broadband issued recommendations regarding cybersecurity in their 2016, 2017, 22
and 2018 annual reports. After consistent recommendation by the Broadband Task Force, a 23
Legislative Commission on Cybersecurity was established in 2021 to provide oversight of the 24
state’s cybersecurity measures and review and make policy recommendations to state agencies and 25
the legislature to strengthen the state’s cybersecurity infrastructure. However, many of the 26
commission and task force recommendations have not yet been implemented, which creates 27
cybersecurity vulnerabilities especially at the local level as many communities lack the necessary 28
58
tools and capabilities needed to protect their systems. The problem is serious. Each month 1
Minnesota IT Services defends against roughly 27,000 phishing emails and messages across all 2
state agencies and several cities and counties have been recent targets of ransomware attacks as 3
local governments continue to remain particularly vulnerable to cyberattacks. The passage of the 4
federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 provided additional federal resources to 5
Minnesota to better prepare the state’s preparedness and response to future cyberattacks. However, 6
even with additional federal resources, many cities across the state remain vulnerable to 7
cyberattack and are in need of hardware and software support. 8
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports state action to identify and strengthen 9
state and local capabilities. The League supports the inclusion of funding to evaluate state 10
government cyber vulnerabilities, single points of failure, and fixes, and, based on those 11
findings, create an ability for municipal governments to apply for grant funding or 12
assistance to help conduct the same evaluation. Additionally, state and federal policymakers 13
should: 14
a) Seek municipal government input on any direction of state or federal funding that seeks 15
to address cybersecurity preparedness and response and ensure city government 16
participation in any task force or planning committee tasked with directing funding 17
priorities for local government cybersecurity efforts; 18
a)b) Ensure that any grant program administered by Minnesota IT balances the 19
unique needs of smaller less-resourced cities and larger cities and base cybersecurity 20
funding opportunities on locally identified needs; 21
b)c) Avoid unfunded mandates related to data notification breaches by ensuring 22
proactive discussions with lawmakers and state leaders regarding cybersecurity 23
awareness, prevention, remediation and breach notification 24
SD-49. Legalization of Fireworks 25
Issue: In 2002, the state enacted a law allowing the sale and use of non-aerial, non-explosive 26
consumer fireworks, including sparklers, party poppers, snakes, and other novelty items—relaxing 27
59
the ban on consumer fireworks in place in Minnesota since 1941. In 2008, the Legislature further 1
relaxed the ban by increasing the amount of explosive material allowed in legal fireworks. 2
Local fire service professionals have reported that consumers and law enforcement personnel have 3
had difficulty distinguishing between legal and illegal fireworks, and that the 2002 law resulted in 4
greater use in Minnesota of illegal fireworks purchased in other states. 5
According to data provided by the Minnesota State Fire Marshal Division, injury trends and dollar 6
losses related to fireworks incidents surged after the consumer fireworks ban was lifted. Hospital 7
reports reveal that the annual number of injuries caused by fireworks rose dramatically in 2002 and 8
remains elevated. Likewise, Minnesota Fire Incident Reporting System records show that the 9
annual dollar loss resulting from fireworks incidents increased significantly in 2002 and has since 10
grown. 11
In 2003, the state enacted a number of provisions limiting local authority pertaining to fireworks 12
sales. The 2003 law caps the allowable municipal permit fee at $100 per vendor selling fireworks 13
with other products, and $350 per vendor selling fireworks exclusively. The law restricts cities 14
from requiring fireworks sellers to purchase additional liability insurance. Finally, the 2003 law 15
states that cities cannot prohibit or restrict the display of consumer fireworks if the display and 16
structure comply with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 1124. The NFPA is a 17
private international association of individuals and trade and professional organizations. (NFPA 18
Standard 1124 is not a public document and is available only for a fee.) 19
Fireworks products can cause serious injuries and fire loss. The legal sale of consumer fireworks 20
undermines fire prevention efforts. The sale and use of consumer fireworks increase local public 21
safety enforcement, emergency response, and fire-suppression costs. 22
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities opposes legislation that would further relax the 23
ban on the sale and use of consumer fireworks. The League supports a repeal of the 2002 law 24
that relaxes the ban on the sale and use of consumer fireworks. 25
Fees are needed to cover the costs associated with compliance checks, education, and 26
inspections relating to the sale of a regulated product. The current fee caps do not allow 27
cities to recover these costs. The League supports allowing cities to establish and impose 28
60
reasonable fees on retailers that sell fireworks. The League opposes restrictions on requiring 1
fireworks retailers to purchase additional liability insurance. Finally, the League seeks 2
repeal of the NFPA reference. 3
SD-50. Traffic Enforcement Cameras* 4
Issue: Drivers who disobey traffic laws can cause serious traffic accidents and contribute to 5
gridlock. In spite of the severity of this problem, cities cannot always afford the levels of peace 6
officer enforcement that residents demand. The technology exists to enforce traffic laws with 7
photographic evidence. For example, there is less running of red lights when motions imaging 8
recording systems (MIRS) are installed at traffic signals. 9
Response: Local law enforcement agencies should have the express authority to use photo 10
enforcement technology to enforce traffic laws. Sworn and non-sworn Llocal law 11
enforcement officers should have the express authority to issue citations for traffic violations 12
by mail where the violation is detected with photographic evidence. 13
SD-51. Operation of Motorized Foot Scooters 14
Issue: Current state statute (Minn. Stat. § 169.225) regulates the operation of motorized foot 15
scooters and treats motorized foot scooters similar to bicycles in terms of rights and duties. By 16
statutory definition (Minn. Stat. § 169.011, subd. 46), motorized foot scooters must be powered by 17
an engine or motor that is limited to a maximum speed of 15 miles per hour. The law provides that 18
an operator must be 12 years of age or older. Although the law contains safety provisions, 19
including a requirement that operators under the age of 18 must wear helmets, it does not require 20
training or permits for operators of any age. 21
Motorized foot scooters that are part of organized sharing or rental businesses rely on the ability to 22
park in the public right-of-way, especially on public sidewalks, to facilitate customer access and 23
vending. Cities have express authority to regulate parking on city streets and sidewalks. Local 24
government units should also have clear authority to regulate or proscribe unauthorized use of city 25
right-of-way for motorized foot scooter parking, to require a permit or license for each scooter or 26
sharing company, and to include terms and conditions dictated by the granting authority. 27
61
In order to protect public health, safety and welfare, it is important that cities have clear authority 1
to regulate motorized foot scooter parking and sharing options. 2
Response: State law should support the ability of local governments to regulate or proscribe 3
unauthorized use of city right-of-way for motorized foot scooter parking, to require a permit 4
or license authorizing motorized foot scooter parking or sharing in the public right-of-way, 5
and to impose terms, conditions, and local rules on businesses seeking such a permit or 6
license. 7
SD-52. Catalytic Converter Theft* 8
Issue: Cities across Minnesota have seen increases in the theft of catalytic converters, a part of a 9
vehicle’s exhaust system that converts some pollutants into less harmful gasses. Removal of a 10
catalytic converter causes extensive damage to a vehicle. Criminals remove catalytic converters 11
from parked automobiles and profit by selling them to scrap metal dealers. Preventing catalytic 12
converter theft is difficult because it is not illegal for an individual to possess multiple catalytic 13
converters, nor is it illegal for scrap metal dealers to purchase catalytic converters from 14
individuals. 15
In 2021 the Legislature established a catalytic converter theft prevention pilot program. It provided 16
funding for law enforcement agencies to offer vehicle owners the opportunity to have their 17
catalytic converters permanently marked with identifiers. Although the pilot program has deterred 18
some catalytic converter theft, it has not proven to be a solution to the problem. 19
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports legislation making it unlawful for a 20
scrap metal dealer to purchase a catalytic converter from any person other than a bona fide 21
automobile recycling facility or a person who can provide evidence of legitimate removal. 22
The League also supports making it a crime to be in possession of one or more catalytic 23
converters that do not belong to a vehicle or vehicles owned by the individual in possession of 24
the catalytic converter(s), or that the individual cannot provide verification of legal receipt of 25
the catalytic converter from the vehicle owner. 26
62
SD-53. Drug Courts 1
Issue: The League of Minnesota Cities recognizes the impact of substance abuse on individuals, 2
communities and taxpayers. According to the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug 3
Dependence, the relationship between alcohol and drugs and crimes--including domestic abuse and 4
violence, underage drinking, robbery, assault and sexual assault--is clearly documented. The 5
National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse reports 65 percent of the nation’s inmates meet 6
certain medical criteria for substance abuse and addiction, but only 11 percent received treatment 7
for their addictions. 8
Drug courts are an effective problem-solving approach for dealing with alcohol and other drug 9
addicted offenders in the judicial system. Drug courts closely monitor the defendant's progress 10
toward sobriety and recovery through ongoing treatment, frequent drug testing, regular mandatory 11
check-in court appearances, and the use of a range of immediate sanctions and incentives to foster 12
behavior change. 13
In drug court, judges collaborate with other traditional court participants (prosecutors, defense 14
counsel, treatment providers, probation officers, law enforcement, educational and vocational 15
experts, community leaders and others), whose roles have been substantially modified, but not 16
relinquished, in the interest of helping defendants deal with addiction. 17
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the efforts of drug courts to address 18
substance abuse and reduce crime. The League supports funding for additional drug courts. 19
SD-54. Drug Paraphernalia* 20
Issue: Cities throughout the state struggle with local businesses selling items primarily designed to 21
enable illegal drug use. Current state law only prohibits use, possession, delivery, and 22
advertisements of drug paraphernalia. The law inadequately defines the term “drug paraphernalia,” 23
and leaves cities to pass more effective ordinances “prohibiting or otherwise regulating the 24
manufacture, delivery, possession, or advertisement of drug paraphernalia.” 25
Many cities have adopted their own ordinances to regulate drug paraphernalia, including 26
specifically prohibiting sales. But for a variety of reasons, business owners routinely challenge 27
63
these ordinances as unconstitutional and then successfully invoke virulent public outcry on that 1
basis. This experience—along with costly court challenges—discourages other cities from taking 2
similar steps to curb illegal drug activity, and leaves most cities only able to enforce an inadequate 3
state law. 4
Most states immediately around Minnesota define “drug paraphernalia” in a detailed way based on 5
a 1979 model federal law designed to avoid constitutional issues. Minnesota does not. Federal law 6
and the law of half the states immediately around Minnesota explicitly ban sales of drug 7
paraphernalia, but Minnesota does not. The current state of the law arguably makes drug 8
paraphernalia easier to obtain in Minnesota than in the states immediately surrounding it. 9
In 2023 the legislature modified several provisions pertaining to the sale and possession of drug 10
paraphernalia. As a result, under current state statutes it is not a crime to sell or possess drug 11
paraphernalia, and possession of drug paraphernalia containing a residual amount of one or more 12
mixtures of controlled substances is exempted from the definition of drug possession. The 13
definition of “drug paraphernalia” does not include hypodermic syringes or needles or any 14
instrument or implement which can be adapted for subcutaneous injection. The laws pertaining to 15
the sale of drug paraphernalia conflict with some previously adopted local ordinances, and the 16
decriminalization of possession of drug paraphernalia may create unintended consequences for law 17
enforcement. 18
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports a requirement for the Department of 19
Public Safety to collect data during the implementation of the 2023 changes to drug 20
paraphernalia laws. If the laws are shown to have unintended public safety consequences, the 21
League supports passage of legislation that would limit the sale and possession of drug 22
paraphernalia strengthening the current statutory prohibition on drug paraphernalia, 23
including improving the statutory definition of “drug paraphernalia” and explicitly 24
prohibiting sales. 25
SD-55. Regulation of Massage Therapists 26
Issue: The state does not currently license nor register massage therapists. Minn. Stat. ch. 146A is 27
the Complementary and Alternative Health Care Practices Act which identifies prohibited provider 28
64
conduct and authorizes the Minnesota Department of Health to take disciplinary action against 1
noncompliant providers who are not registered or licensed by a health-related licensing board. The 2
office has authority to respond to allegations of prohibited behavior through an investigatory 3
process but this function is triggered mainly by consumer complaints and there is no requirement 4
that the office take any action. Additionally, resources for these purposes have been severely 5
limited. 6
In absence of any required statewide standards or regulation, several cities have entered the 7
traditional state domain of health-care licensure by enacting ordinances that require all massage 8
therapists to obtain a local professional license and many cities have also required bricks and 9
mortar establishments to obtain a business license. These ordinances help local law enforcement 10
officers to differentiate between legitimate providers and businesses engaged in sex trafficking and 11
prostitution as well as provide for health and sanitation standards. 12
City staff and law enforcement have spent much time and resources conducting statewide criminal 13
background checks; investigating massage therapist accreditation programs to determine 14
legitimacy and credibility; and inspecting and monitoring establishments due to citizen complaints 15
and concerns. This has resulted in different procedures, requirements and fee structures across the 16
state. Despite the thorough work of city staff and law enforcement, when an illegitimate business 17
suspects investigation, it will often close down and re-open in a different city. Without any sort of 18
statewide database of these businesses, one city’s solution may become another city’s problem. 19
Additionally, local law enforcement agencies do not have access to national criminal history data. 20
This has allowed those with criminal convictions in other states related to sex trafficking and 21
prostitution to obtain massage therapy business and/or professional licenses in cities in Minnesota. 22
Allowing access to this information could help cities prevent sex trafficking across state lines. 23
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the statewide registration or licensure of 24
massage therapists that would not pre-empt the ability of cities to regulate massage therapy 25
establishments. The League also supports legislation pertaining to the practice of massage 26
therapy that accomplishes the following: 27
65
a) Helps cities establish legitimacy of providers and businesses applying for a local license to 1
practice, including allowing local law enforcement agencies access to national criminal 2
history databases. 3
b) Prevents individuals from conducting criminal activities such as prostitution and sex 4
trafficking out of establishments operating as massage therapy facilities. 5
c) Improves provider compliance with Minn. Stat. ch. 146A and requires the state to take 6
action in response to noncompliance. 7
d) Protects the public from injury and from other conditions that may result in harm. 8
SD-56. Regulation of Adult-Use Cannabis and Cannabinoid Products* 9
Issue: The 2023 legislative session enacted legislation making Minnesota the 23rd state across the 10
country to legalize adult-use cannabis. The new law, ch. 342, created a statewide regulatory 11
framework for adult-use cannabis establishing state-issued licenses for the industry from seed to 12
sale. The law also expunged certain prior convictions related to cannabis, implemented a tax on 13
cannabis and cannabinoid products including a Local Government Cannabis Aid fund, and updated 14
criminal penalties related to cannabis. 15
The regulatory structure includes local regulation, with cities responsible for registering certain 16
cannabis businesses that are licensed by the state and conducting compliance checks. The law 17
requires businesses to comply with local zoning ordinances, authorizes cities to implement license 18
limits, and authorizes cities to implement ordinances to establish a petty misdemeanor for public 19
use of cannabis and cannabinoid products. These authorizations aside, cities have very limited 20
discretion in the regulation of the industry. 21
In addition to the adult-use cannabis market, cities continue to navigate the regulation of 22
cannabinoid products legalized by the 2022 legislative session under chapter. § 151.72. As the 23
Office of Cannabis Management is created and rulemaking is conducted, cities have continued to 24
implement local licenses for the products. 25
66
Finally, the new law authorizes cities to impose an interim ordinance to study the issue and restrict, 1
regulate, and prohibit cannabis businesses until January 1, 2025. However, estimates from state 2
agencies and the rulemaking timeline established by law indicates that final rules will not be 3
available until early 2025. The authority to conduct an interim ordinance study should better align 4
with the establishment of rules for the new law to allow cities to properly study the issue. 5
Many questions remain for what is to be seen from the Office of Cannabis Management and the 6
cannabis industry as it is established. Cities will be a critical component of the regulation and 7
enforcement of this industry. 8
As legalization of cannabis and cannabinoid products has become more prevalent in states across 9
the country, the Minnesota legislature has discussed legalization and potential regulatory 10
framework. In 2022, the legislature passed legislation that authorized the sale of certain edibles 11
and beverages infused with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) extracted from hemp. The legislation 12
provided limited regulation of these products in Minn. Stat. § 151.72 under the Board of 13
Pharmacy, including restrictions and requirements on packaging, labeling, amount of THC, and 14
sale of these products to those under the age of 21. 15
Cities were not consulted during the drafting of this legislation but have local concerns that need to 16
be addressed. Though the new law has some regulations on the products, there are significant gaps 17
in state oversight and accountability of the manufacturing and production, testing, and distribution 18
of the products. Additionally, the law does not provide any restrictions on where the products can 19
be sold and offers no guidance for local governments to regulate the sale of the products. The new 20
law increases enforcement responsibilities for local governments which will result in additional 21
costs for cities. 22
Lacking significant oversight and regulations at the state level, some cities passed licensing and/or 23
zoning regulations over the products. Though the law does not prohibit local regulation, many 24
outstanding questions remain pertaining to law enforcement, employment, and the state-city 25
dynamic of regulating and enforcing the law related to these newly legal products. 26
There are also outstanding questions for cities as employers. The legal status of the new products 27
creates challenges with existing drug-testing law and abilities. Drug tests can test for THC; 28
67
however, they cannot differentiate whether a positive test for THC is the result of a legal THC 1
edible product or an illegal cannabinoid. Additionally, unlike alcohol intoxication, there are no 2
current tests to indicate intoxication or impairment levels from THC consumption for employees 3
who may be showing signs of intoxication. 4
If pursued by the legislature, the legalization of adult-use cannabis will create additional 5
challenges for cities beyond the THC edible products that were previously legalized. Adult-use 6
cannabis will require a significant amount of time and resources for local law enforcement to 7
ensure compliance and maintain public safety that will be costly for cities. The regulatory 8
framework will extensive oversight at the state and local level. Cities must be consulted and 9
included in the oversight of cannabis and cannabinoid products. 10
Response: In any future legislation, the following should be considered: 11
a) The timeline authorized for interim ordinances to conduct studies on the adult-use 12
cannabis industry should be extended to better align with the conclusion of rulemaking 13
for ch. 342 to provide adequate time for cities to study the rules once adopted. 14
b) Any legislation considered should be responsive to the needs of cities as they arise from 15
the implementation of this industry, including evaluating and potentially increasing the 16
appropriation provided through the Local Government Cannabis Aid fund to ensure 17
adequate funding for local governments to respond to challenges resulting from the 18
cannabis industry. 19
c) Legislation should increase, and at a minimum maintain, any discretion and local control 20
granted to cities in current legislation. 21
d) The League opposes any proposals to diminish local control related to the cannabis 22
industry. 23
As the legislature addresses the legalization of adult-use cannabis and future issues related to 24
cannabinoids cities must be included in the discussion and regulatory framework of these 25
products. 26
A strong state regulatory framework is needed, including: 27
68
a) A strong state regulatory framework with clear licensing, inspection, and enforcement 1
for the cultivation, manufacturing, and distributing to retailers of cannabinoid products. 2
b) Rigorous testing requirements similar to what is required under Minn. Stat. § 152.29 for 3
the medical cannabis program. 4
c) Reporting and enforcement structures for local law enforcement to report to the state, 5
including penalties for non-compliance. 6
d) Reporting and enforcement structure for local governments to address odor issues from 7
processing plants. 8
Cities should maintain the authority for: 9
a) Local licenses for cannabis and cannabinoid product retailers with a state database of 10
licenses. 11
b) Local zoning regulations. 12
c) Local authority to enact restrictions or regulations regarding the sale of cannabis and 13
cannabinoid products more stringent than the state, including the authority to opt-out 14
from authorizing the sale of the products. 15
Public safety needs to be addressed: 16
a) State law should prohibit the possession of cannabis and cannabinoid products for those 17
under 21, acknowledging the adverse effects of criminal penalties for youth. 18
b) Ongoing state resources and training for law enforcement to address costs of public 19
safety concerns such as increased staff for monitoring retailer compliance of state and 20
local regulations and security. 21
c) As technology becomes available for product testing, the state should provide resources 22
to local law enforcement for testing retail products to ensure compliance. 23
Revenue and taxation considerations must be addressed: 24
69
a) Knowing that local law enforcement will need to spend a significant amount of time and 1
resources in enforcing cannabis and cannabinoid products, the state must fund this 2
mandate. 3
b) Local jurisdictions should be authorized to impose a local impact tax at their discretion 4
with broad flexibility on the ability to use revenue. 5
Unique employment concerns need to be addressed: 6
a) Minnesota and Federal law should clarify the duty and obligations of restricted 7
employees, such as CDL holders and firearm-holding employees, as they relate to off-8
duty consumption of legal cannabis products. 9
b) The legislature should clarify Minn. Stat. § 181.953 subd. 10, Minnesota’s Drug and 10
Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (DATWA), regarding how the requirement for 11
employers to give an employee who tests positive the opportunity to participate in either a 12
drug or alcohol counseling or rehab after consultation with a certified chemical use 13
counselor applies to the new edible THC products. 14
c) The legislature should clarify that an employer is allowed to require an employee or 15
applicant undergo cannabis testing or drug and alcohol testing for the purpose of 16
determining the presence or absence of cannabis as a condition of employment for peace 17
officer and/or firefighter positions. 18
The state should consider public health concerns: 19
a) The state should create and fund public health campaigns for education on the impacts of 20
cannabis and cannabinoid products, training for retailers, safe use education, and 21
adolescent use prevention. 22
SD-57. Lawful Gambling and Local Control 23
Issue: As part of the 2009 reforms to lawful gambling statutes, some local control was removed 24
from the lawful gambling process. Previously, the lawful gambling licensee would have to obtain 25
the city council’s approval as part of its application to renew the organization’s premises permit 26
70
(some forms of lawful gambling require obtaining an organizational license and a premises 1
permit(s) from the state). This step was removed when the state established a perpetual 2
organizational license and premises permitting system. Because these licenses and permits are 3
issued by the state, under the current system a city’s authority over these licensees is limited to: 1) 4
approval of the initial premises permit; and 2) enforcement of the city’s lawful gambling 5
ordinance. Some city officials have concerns that gambling organizations will be more apt to 6
ignore local regulations (such as spending the required percentage of lawful gambling expenditures 7
in the city’s trade area) if they don’t need the city’s approval for the renewal of their state-issued 8
premises permits. 9
Response: The licensee should be required to obtain local approval on an annual basis, or at 10
longer intervals as determined by the city, and file the resolution of local approval with the 11
Gambling Control Board. 12
SD-58. Liquor Liability Insurance Limits 13
Issue: Minn. Stat. § 340A.409 requires that “no retail license may be issued, maintained or 14
renewed unless the applicant demonstrates proof of financial responsibility with regard to liability 15
imposed by Minn. Stat. § 340A.801” relating to the sale of alcoholic beverages. The minimum 16
limits of liability currently in statute require $50,000 of coverage because of bodily injury to any 17
one person in any one occurrence, $100,000 because of bodily injury to two or more persons in 18
any one occurrence, $10,000 because of injury to or destruction of property of others in any one 19
occurrence, $50,000 for loss of means of support of any one person in any one occurrence, 20
$100,000 for loss of means of support of two or more persons in any one occurrence, $50,000 for 21
other pecuniary loss of any one person in any one occurrence, and $100,000 for other pecuniary 22
loss of two or more persons in any one occurrence. These limits have not been updated since at 23
least 1985 and would provide very little relief to persons impacted by an intoxicated person. 24
While cities can choose to require higher limits of liability than required by statute, it may create 25
competitive imbalance between communities if the limits are not consistent. 26
Response: The minimum limits in Minn. Stat. § 340A.409 should be increased to $500,000 27
per occurrence with a $500,000 annual aggregate. 28
71
SD-59. On-Sale Liquor or Wine Licenses 1
Issue: Minn. Stat. § 340A.404 defines the establishments to which a city may issue an on-sale 2
intoxicating liquor license. Every year cities see local businesses and organizations with innovative 3
models for event centers, food halls, arenas, boutiques, museums, art spaces, and cultural or 4
community centers that are not clearly named in this statute but would like to obtain a liquor 5
license. Several cities have received special legislation allowing their municipalities to issue on-6
sale liquor or wine licenses to these types of entities. However, this process interferes with the 7
ability of municipalities to respond expeditiously to innovative business models, control the 8
placement and operating manner of these entities, and limits municipalities from providing 9
licenses for businesses that would generate local tourism and revenue. 10
Response: The Legislature should modernize and expand the list of establishments in Minn. 11
Stat. § 340A.404 to which municipalities are authorized to issue on-sale liquor or wine 12
licenses, subject to restrictions imposed by the municipality, to allow for innovative business 13
models and economic development within their jurisdiction. 14
SD-60. Liquor Licensing of Non-Contiguous Spaces 15
Issue: During the COVID-19 outbreak, restaurants and bars were able to open at limited capacity 16
for in-person service with spacing requirements between tables both inside and outside. To provide 17
opportunities for businesses to open and serve the public, many cities allowed for non-contiguous 18
spacing of tables outside despite requirements outlined in Minn. Stat. § 340A.410, subd 7. This 19
allowed customers to go to restaurants and bars and remain outside, which had been deemed 20
preferable to dining indoors in mitigating the risk of exposure to the virus. This model proved to be 21
successful for many businesses and enjoyed by residents. Cities would like to respond to customer 22
and business expectations and continue being authorized to issue licenses to non-contiguous 23
spaces. 24
Response: The increased flexibility during the COVID-19 pandemic allowed businesses and 25
cities to partner in response to the pandemic and city residents have enjoyed increased 26
seating options. The League of Minnesota Cities supports amending Minn. Stat. § 340A.410 27
72
to allow for licensing of spaces that are not compact and contiguous during and after the 1
pandemic. 2
SD-61. Wine and Off-Sale Licenses 3
Issue: Minn. Stat. ch. 340A authorizes cities to issue liquor licenses to various establishments 4
within their jurisdictions, but in virtually all cases, the license issued by the city is not valid until 5
the state approves it. This is true for such commonly issued licenses as wine, off-sale intoxicating 6
liquor and temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses. The result is extra time spent for city 7
staff, as well as a time-based commercial impact to the business pursuing the original license. 8
Additionally, if a business applies for an on-sale wine license, the state may choose to conduct an 9
inspection of the business further delaying approval of the license and full operation of the 10
establishment. This inspection is often in addition to a city certificate of occupancy inspection and 11
a county health inspection. 12
Response: The Legislature should remove the requirement of approval by the commissioner 13
for city-issued liquor licenses and simply require cities to notify the state of newly issued and 14
renewed licenses as is already the case for intoxicating on-sale liquor licenses and all 3.2-15
liquor licenses. If the state requires an inspection to certify an on-sale wine license, this 16
should be delegated to either the city or county to be conducted at the same time as other 17
inspections. This will expedite the process for both the state and the business. 18
SD-62. Youth Access to Alcohol and Tobacco 19
Issue: To promote public safety and public health, cities have an interest in preventing youth from 20
obtaining alcohol and tobacco. For example, the Minnesota Department of Health reports that 80 21
percent of adult smokers had their first cigarette before the age of 18; reducing youth tobacco use 22
may help prevent adverse impacts of tobacco in the future. To this end, many cities operate 23
compliance check programs in an effort to discern the current level of youth access and to reduce 24
youth access. Statewide, a number of cities have created community partnerships with their court 25
systems, local businesses, and school districts to quickly address problems associated with youth 26
access to alcohol and tobacco. 27
73
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities opposes any proposal that could result in 1
increased risks of youth access to alcohol and tobacco products and supports statutory 2
changes that assist in reducing youth access to alcohol and tobacco products. The League 3
supports locally-determined alcohol compliance check programs, but any state mandate for 4
alcohol compliance checks should come with state-supported funding initiatives to support 5
these locally-determined compliance efforts. The Legislature should consider a grant 6
program supporting locally-based community partnerships that can quickly and effectively 7
respond to youth access problems. 8
SD-63. Consumer Small Loans 9
Issue: Consumer small loans, also known as “payday loans,” are short-term cash loans based on 10
the borrower's personal check held for future deposit or on electronic access to the borrower's bank 11
account. Borrowers write a personal check for the amount borrowed plus the finance charge and 12
receive cash. In some cases, borrowers sign over electronic access to their bank accounts to receive 13
and repay payday loans. Lenders hold the checks until the borrower’s next payday when loans and 14
the finance charge must be paid in one lump sum. 15
Consumer small loans are typically predatory in nature. According to Debt.org, an organization 16
dedicated to helping consumers understand and overcome debt, predatory lenders typically target 17
minorities, the poor, the elderly and the less educated. They also prey on people who need 18
immediate cash for emergencies such as paying medical bills, making a home repair or car 19
payment. These lenders also target borrowers that do not qualify for conventional loans or lines of 20
credit due to credit problems or unemployment. 21
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities seeks statewide legislation that would protect 22
consumer small loan borrowers against predatory lending practices. Also, cities should have 23
explicit authority to regulate consumer small loan conditions including the ability to cap 24
finance charges and interest rates. 25
74
SD-64. Regulation of Mobile Businesses 1
Issue: The transient nature of mobile businesses presents unique challenges to traditional city 2
zoning and permitting and may create an unfair competitive advantage over traditional businesses 3
that pay property taxes and generate income for a city. Cities also make significant investments in 4
the development of retail districts and downtowns and have a strong interest in maintaining a level 5
playing field for brick and mortar establishments. 6
Minnesota has seen a sharp increase in the number of food trucks (Mobile Food Units) operating 7
throughout the state. Food trucks are licensed as food and beverage service establishments by the 8
Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) or by local jurisdictions pursuant to an MDH delegation 9
agreement. Food trucks are prohibited from operating in the same location for more than 21 days 10
without approval of the regulatory authority. 11
In 2015, the Legislature authorized the Board of Cosmetologist Examiners to adopt rules 12
governing the licensure, operation and inspection of “Mobile Salons” which are operated in a 13
mobile vehicle or mobile structure for exclusive use to offer personal services defined in Minn. 14
Stat. § 155A.23, subd. 3. The rules must prohibit mobile salons from violating reasonable 15
municipal restrictions on time and place of operation of a mobile salon within its jurisdiction, and 16
shall establish penalties, up to and including revocation of a license, for repeated violations of 17
municipal laws. 18
Response: It is appropriate for mobile businesses to be licensed by the state or its designees in 19
the same manner as non-mobile business establishments. Such state regulation must not 20
preempt the ability of local governments to enact reasonable time and place restrictions on 21
the operation of mobile businesses within their jurisdictions. 22
SD-65. Regulation of Party Buses and Boats-for-Hire 23
Issue: A party bus (also known as a party ride, limo bus, limousine bus, party van, or luxury bus) 24
is a large motor vehicle usually derived from a conventional (school) bus or coach, but modified 25
and designed to carry 8 or more people for recreational purposes. In Minnesota, these vehicles are 26
regulated by default under Minn. Stat. ch. 221 (the chapter of law dealing with motor carriers) and 27
75
registered by the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation’s (MnDOT’s) Office of Freight and 1
Commercial Vehicle Operations. The regulations require operators to carry commercial insurance, 2
have an annual vehicle inspection and be registered with the state. Party bus drivers are required to 3
hold a current commercial driver’s license (CDL) issued through the Minnesota Dept. of Public 4
Safety’s Driver and Vehicle Services Division. 5
A boat-for-hire is a watercraft used by owners and operators to carry passengers for hire. Minn. 6
Stat. § 326B.94 and Minn. Rules 5225.6000 through 5225.7200 govern the requirements of boat 7
owners and operators carrying passengers for hire on Minnesota’s inland waters. These vessels 8
must have a permit to carry passengers for hire. They must have an annual safety inspection and a 9
dry-dock inspection performed by Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry boiler inspection 10
personnel once every three years (or annually if the hull is made of wood). The vessels must also 11
be operated by a licensed master and must follow all Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources’ 12
boating and water recreation regulations. 13
Party buses and boats-for-hire are sometimes chartered for celebrations such as weddings, proms, 14
bachelor and bachelorette parties, birthdays and tours. Party buses are also popular for round trips 15
to casinos and sporting events, and personalized drop-offs and pick-ups at various bars and 16
nightclubs. Additionally, both party buses and boats-for-hire have become popular settings for 17
adult entertainment. 18
Cities have seen a sharp increase in the number of party buses and boats-for-hire being used as 19
venues for illegal activities such as underage drinking, drug use and sex trafficking. The transient 20
nature of party buses and boats-for-hire presents unique challenges to traditional city zoning, 21
permitting and law enforcement. While state laws regulate requirements for the operation of party 22
buses and boats-for-hire, the law is silent on enforcement, penalties, inspection and liability related 23
to illegal activities that occur in party buses and on boats-for-hire. 24
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports changes to state statutes that would help 25
reduce criminal activities taking place on party buses and boats-for-hire. Specifically, the 26
League supports: 27
76
a) Creation of statutory definitions of “party bus” and “boat-for-hire” that contain 1
permissible uses of the vehicles; 2
b) Prohibition on offering or allowing “adult entertainment” as defined by Minn. Stat. § 3
617.242, “sexual conduct” as defined by Minn. Stat. § 617.241, or “nudity” as defined by 4
Minn. Stat. § 617.292, subd. 3, on party buses and boats-for-hire; 5
c) Explicit authority for peace officers to investigate suspicious activities on party buses and 6
boats-for-hire and to cite individuals on board who are involved in illegal activities; and 7
d) Requiring the appropriate authority to utilize existing authority to impose fines, or to 8
deny, suspend, or revoke permits or registration certificates held by operators found to 9
have adult entertainment, drug, or underage consumption violations. 10
SD-66. Environmental Protection 11
Issue: Cities demonstrate strong stewardship for the protection and preservation of the 12
environment. Minnesota municipalities have historically been the leading funding source for 13
environmental protection and improvements. Municipal efforts include environmental protection 14
through wastewater treatment, wetland restorations, stormwater treatment, public utility emission 15
reductions, brownfield cleanup, safe drinking water programs, as well as others. 16
At some point, however, the diminishing or nonexistent environmental benefit received from 17
additional efforts is fiscally irresponsible. The programs are often improperly designed to meet 18
their stated goals. Additionally, the absence of funding by the state and federal government has 19
removed an essential restraining feature in program design and implementation. Agencies are less 20
accountable to the governments that mandate environmental programs when they do not have to 21
find the money to implement the programs. 22
Specific problems faced by cities include: 23
e) New programs or standards are continually adopted without regard to the existence, 24
attainability or cost of existing programs and standards. 25
77
f) Regulatory bodies fail to consistently use the best science available and the most current and 1
accurate data when establishing water quality standards. 2
g) Regulatory bodies impose new permit requirements without going through rulemaking. 3
Instead, the agencies rely on internal documents, program strategies, and “best professional 4
judgment of staff” when setting permit criteria. 5
h) Regulatory bodies approve permits and programs that compete with traditional municipal 6
services and encourage urban sprawl. This behavior puts at risk the public investments and 7
growth management efforts cities have made when planning for future development. 8
i) Permit fees and other cost-transfer elements of federal and state programs do not provide an 9
incentive for environmental agency efficiency, policy prioritization or risk assessment. 10
Additionally, all residents of the state contribute to the need for wastewater, drinking water, 11
and stormwater treatment and benefit from the resulting improved water quality. These factors 12
make the state general fund an appropriate source for significant portions of state water 13
program funding. 14
j) Third-party environmental advocacy groups create significant hardships on cities by 15
threatening litigation even when the best science available may not support the groups’ 16
positions. 17
k) Cities are often required to pay the cost of removing problem materials from the waste stream, 18
rather than preventing the problem at the consumer product or manufacturing level. 19
Response: Alternative wastewater treatment and cooperative service systems should be 20
prohibited from operating in areas that can reasonably and effectively be served by existing 21
municipal systems, unless: 22
a) The municipal system is proven to be substantially less cost-effective and substantially 23
less beneficial to the environment; and 24
b) The operation of these systems will not create a stranded public investment in the existing 25
system. 26
78
Sufficient state and federal financial assistance should be provided to local governments 1
when complying with state and federal infrastructure requirements, particularly with regard 2
to wastewater, stormwater, and drinking water facilities. 3
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) should streamline its permitting and re-4
issuing processes to allow for effluent standards and permit requirements to be known 5
earlier, thereby giving communities more time to defend against contested case hearings. 6
The Legislature should require the MPCA to make its determination regarding permit-7
required submittals, permit modifications, and the reissuance of a permit within a 8
reasonable set time period, and require the MPCA to make its determinations and reissue 9
the permit within that reasonable set time frame. 10
The state should ensure townships are required to meet the same environmental protection 11
and regulatory requirements as cities. 12
Legislation should be passed that requires state agencies to establish permit requirements 13
only when the criteria they are using is developed through the rule-making process. 14
State agencies need to develop science-based standards and quantify new effluent standards, 15
ensuring that they are scientifically and economically practicable. State and federal agencies 16
should coordinate and integrate their monitoring data to assure that all pertinent data is 17
available and utilized. 18
The state general fund is an appropriate source for state water program funding. Municipal 19
water permit fees should only be increased if new revenue is needed because of increased 20
costs of processing municipal water permits or if the funds would go for specific scientific 21
research, technical and financial support for cities, or agency staffing needed by cities to 22
address environmental and public health concerns, not as a means to generate new revenue 23
to cover other budget shortfalls. 24
Additionally, the Legislature should create effective, producer-led reduction, reuse, and 25
recycling programs to deal with a product’s lifecycle impacts from design through end-of-life 26
management and should regulate products and compounds that damage water quality, sewer 27
79
collection, stormwater or wastewater treatment systems at the consumer and manufacturing 1
levels, not just at the treatment and infrastructure maintenance level. Examples include 2
requiring accurate labeling as to whether disposable wipes can be safely flushed and creating 3
incentives for private salt applicators to reduce the volume of salt they apply. 4
SD-67. Impaired Waters 5
Issue: Despite the billions of dollars that Minnesota municipalities have invested and continue to 6
invest in wastewater and stormwater management systems, and best management practices to 7
protect, preserve, and restore the quality of Minnesota’s surface waters, the quality of some of 8
Minnesota’s surface waters does not meet federal water quality requirements. The federal Clean 9
Water Act requires that further efforts be made by the state to reduce human impacts on surface 10
waters that are determined to be impaired due to high pollutant loads of nutrients, bacteria, 11
sediment, mercury, and other contaminants. Scientific studies of these waters must be conducted to 12
determine how much pollution they can handle (Total Maximum Daily Loads, or TMDLs). The 13
pollutant load reduction requirements will affect municipal, industrial, and agricultural practices 14
and operations along any river, stream or lake determined to be impaired. While the sources of 86 15
percent of the pollutants affecting Minnesota waters are non-point sources, there will also be new 16
costs and requirements for point-source dischargers, like municipal wastewater treatment facilities. 17
Municipal stormwater systems will also face increased protective requirements and regulation as 18
part of the state’s impaired waters program. 19
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities will work actively with the administration, the 20
Legislature, and other stakeholders in the design and implementation of Minnesota’s 21
impaired waters program to: 22
a) Ensure equitable funding solutions are found, such as the state general fund or bonding, 23
that broadly collect revenue to address this statewide problem; 24
b) Support legislative appropriation of constitutionally dedicated clean water revenues that 25
will supplement traditional sources of funding for these purposes, not be used to cover 26
budget cuts, backfill past program reductions, or to otherwise supplant normal state 27
spending on water programs; 28
80
c) Direct the majority of funds collected by the state for impaired waters into programs that 1
fund municipal wastewater and stormwater projects, and for state programs needed for 2
municipal wastewater and stormwater permitting and technical support, including the 3
Clean Water Revolving Loan Fund, Wastewater Infrastructure Fund, TMDL Grants 4
Program, Small Community Wastewater Treatment Grant and Loan Program, and other 5
state programs that provide financial resources for city wastewater treatment facilities, 6
septic tank replacement, stormwater management projects, and other city water quality 7
improvement and protection projects; 8
d) More adequately cover the current five-year wastewater infrastructure funding need 9
projection of more than $1.65 billion; 10
e) Recognize and address the upcoming costs of stormwater management infrastructure 11
and operation on municipalities from new regulatory mandates and load reduction 12
requirements; 13
f) Allow flexibility in achieving pollutant load reductions and limitations through offsets or 14
trading of pollutant load reduction credits for both point and non-point load reduction 15
requirements within watersheds; 16
g) Recognize and credit the work underway and already completed by local units of 17
government to limit point and non-point source water pollutant discharges; 18
h) Recognize the diversity of efforts and needs that exists across the state; 19
i) Ensure the best science available is used to accurately determine the sources of pollutant 20
load in order to maximize positive environmental outcomes and minimize unnecessary 21
regulatory and financial burdens for cities by correctly accounting for and addressing 22
agricultural and other non-point pollutant sources; 23
j) Ensure the state requires that the MPCA retain control of the TMDL development 24
process and that all scientific research related to TMDLs is conducted by the MPCA or 25
qualified, objective parties pursuant to state contracting, procurement, and conflict of 26
interest laws; and 27
81
k) Clarify state water quality mandates so cities know specifically what they are required to 1
do and what methods of achieving those outcomes are acceptable to state and federal 2
regulators. 3
SD-68. Municipal Public Water Supplies 4
Issue: Essential residential water supplies provided by public water supply systems are classified 5
as the highest priority for the use of public water under Minn. Stat. §103G.261. Minnesota cities 6
spend significant resources meeting their responsibility to providing safe, reliable, affordable water 7
to their residents in a sustainable manner. That is an essential element in assuring a healthy and 8
stable future for public health, the environment, and economic development. As a result, municipal 9
water suppliers have collected some of the most current and accurate information available on 10
local water conditions. 11
The state requires extensive planning and permitting processes for municipal water suppliers to 12
document that their systems are drawing water at sustainable levels, that the water is safe for 13
human consumption, that they have land use controls in place to protect public water supplies from 14
contamination, that adequate plans exist for emergency and high demand situations, and that rate 15
structures meet state statutory requirements. Those systems are constantly becoming more 16
technologically, environmentally, and economically efficient. City water suppliers have invested 17
many billions of dollars to develop their utility systems and infrastructure in a manner that meets 18
those criteria. 19
Demand and supply sides of this issue are being addressed throughout the state. Cities have 20
established educational programs, incentives, and local water use restrictions to further improve 21
water conservation efforts, while appliances and plumbing fixtures are becoming more efficient in 22
their water use. Furthermore, stormwater is being infiltrated into the ground at unprecedented 23
levels as part of municipal stormwater permit requirements and is being redirected for irrigation 24
purposes in some cities. 25
Despite those efforts, there are places in the state where monitoring data indicates that water may 26
be being used faster than the supply can sustain, particularly in the case of underground aquifers. 27
These issues are very complex, however, and causes and effects are not always easily documented 28
82
or understood. City water supplies are not the only users of that water, either. Industries, smaller 1
private wells, agricultural operations, irrigation systems, and contamination containment and 2
treatment can all be major drains on local water supplies. 3
Hard facts and sound science need to be used to determine the best courses of action to assure that 4
safe, reliable, affordable water supplies are available to future Minnesotans. Those approaches will 5
vary considerably depending on local water and soil conditions, the types and sizes of users, and 6
the quantity and quality of available water. They also need to be coordinated between the many 7
state entities that play a role in water management and regulations so that scarce local resources 8
are not wasted and efforts are not counterproductive to other priority environmental and public 9
health results. 10
Response: The state should lead the development of sound scientific information on water 11
supply, aquifer recharge, and groundwater availability and quality, making good use of the 12
existing studies, data, and staff expertise of municipal water suppliers. 13
The state should also be working to remove barriers to water re-use, aquifer recharge, 14
encouraging cultural changes in water use practices, applying technology for smart water 15
use, exploring impacts and creative mitigation options at contaminated sites, on ways to 16
incent and enable alternate uses of stormwater, and ways to make sure that all water users 17
play a role in ensuring that water supplies are being managed in a manner that is sustainable 18
for future residents. Those solutions need to keep in mind that essential residential water use 19
is the highest preferred use of public water supplies. 20
Finally, in cases where sound management of water resources will require substantial 21
modifications in public water systems that were previously determined to be adequate, the 22
state needs to be a partner in developing cost-effective solutions and in providing the 23
technical and financial resources to make those changes to prevent communities from being 24
economically uncompetitive. 25
83
SD-69. Municipal Electric Utilities 1
Issue: Municipal electric utilities provide essential community services to many Minnesota cities. 2
The League of Minnesota Cities works closely with the Minnesota Municipal Utilities Association 3
(MMUA) to identify issues of concern and to support their legislative and administrative efforts to 4
address them. 5
How those entities are regulated by the state, how their service territory is defined and amended, 6
how their very limited customer base is protected, and how they are treated in relation to other 7
types of electric utilities is important to them remaining affordable, efficient, and effective. 8
Currently, the legislative proposals have been made to allow unregulated third-party electricity 9
sales from generators directly to the customer, circumventing long-established consumer 10
protections. In some cases, municipal utilities would be required to “wheel” energy from third 11
parties across their power lines to retail customers in violation of the utility’s exclusive service 12
area rights. 13
Another way to arrange third-party sales is by selling electricity from solar panels or other 14
generating equipment sited on a consumer’s own property to retail customers, while maintaining 15
ownership of those panels or equipment. The equipment owner would charge for electricity it 16
provides, yet rely on the local utility to provide reliable service to the customer at all other times. 17
While such arrangements may seem convenient to an unregulated third-party, they come at a 18
significant cost to the utilities and subsequently, to the rate payers of that utility. 19
Providing municipal reliable utility services comes with certain unavoidable expenses such as 20
electric generation, power lines, poles, and substations. These types of fixed costs are on-going and 21
should be equitably shared by the local customers. However, both current and previously proposed 22
changes to state law would give third-party providers an advantage subsidized by the remaining 23
rate payers and/or taxpayer. 24
Response: The legislature should support and maintain the current regulatory compact, and 25
recognize the value of the dependable services provided by municipal utilities, and the fact 26
that municipal utilities are accountable directly to the citizens. Further, the legislature 27
84
should reject giving third-party providers any advantage over municipal utilities, as well as 1
any other effort to de-regulate utilities. 2
Additionally, current state practice is for the Department of Commerce and Public Utility 3
Commission to require payment of quarterly fees on municipal utilities to the Department of 4
Commerce three quarters in advance. The state should bill for those fees only for the 5
upcoming quarter. 6
SD-70. State Support for Municipal Energy Policy Goals 7
Issue: The State of Minnesota has adopted an aggressive energy policy focusing on the promotion 8
of energy efficiency and the expansion of renewable energy with the goal of achieving a reduction 9
in carbon generation through reduced use of fossil fuels. To meet state energy and greenhouse gas 10
reduction goals, efforts at the city level will be essential. That local work will generate significant 11
economic benefits both in communities where it is done and more broadly, as industries and 12
professional contractors expand their services throughout the state. 13
Minnesota cities share this goal, as demonstrated by over 140 cities voluntarily participating in the 14
GreenStep Cities program. However, already strained budgets and reserves at the state and local 15
level have limited the ability of the state to assist local units of government in furthering specific 16
projects that support the overall state goal. In addition, institutional knowledge and capacity of 17
most cities limits their ability to explore energy efficiency or renewable energy projects, even 18
projects whose energy “payback” could finance project capital costs. 19
As the role cities are playing in reducing energy use and developing renewable energy generation 20
expands, how those efforts are affected by electric utility practices also becomes more important. 21
Utility billing is not consistent between electric utilities, with many using different rate categories, 22
significantly complicating B3 benchmarking reporting and billing transparency. For projects on 23
which a utility provides capital, the length of time over which city projects are amortized can also 24
be extended to the point that energy cost savings are eliminated, even with substantial demand 25
reductions. The application of demand and peak demand rates in repayment schedules can also 26
reduce or eliminate energy cost savings. 27
85
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities calls on our legislators and state executive 1
agencies charged with accomplishing the state’s energy policy goals to assist cities, townships 2
and counties with tailored efforts to identify appropriate energy efficiency and renewable 3
energy projects for undertaking at the local level. Among those tools, the state should: 4
a) Provide grants to support the development of local climate action and adaptation plans 5
and tie those plans to funding made available to implement them; 6
b) Where possible, build on existing assistance and incentive programs to limit duplication 7
of effort, improve efficiency, and minimize new tracking and reporting requirements; 8
c) Help ensure that reduced energy use results in reduced energy costs by addressing 9
problems with amortization timing; 10
d) Have laws that allow and support utility grant and loan programs; 11
e) Create a grant program to assist in covering local capital costs to install solar energy 12
systems on public buildings; 13
f) Use proceeds from the Renewable Development Fund to support local government 14
projects; 15
g) Provide increased flexibility for utilities to work with local government; 16
h) Support development of a unified electric energy billing and usage structure that is easily 17
imported into a B3 Benchmarking tracking system; 18
i) Develop a framework that allows Property Assessed Clean Energy Programs; 19
j) Play an increased role in providing a comprehensive network of charging stations to 20
support a transition to electric vehicles and equitable access to charging stations; 21
k) Create a grant and loan program to offset start-up capital expenses for projects identified 22
where the savings in energy costs can offset capital project costs or where projects are 23
needed to meet energy policy goals; 24
86
l) Clarify state law so that cities may use public utility franchise agreements to advance 1
energy policy goals, and; 2
m) Recognize that for the state to meet its goals, hands-on state energy agency technical 3
expertise needs to be made available to cities at no cost. 4
SD-71. Urban Forest Management Funding* 5
Issue: Urban forests are an essential part of city infrastructure. Dutch elm disease, oak wilt 6
disease, drought, storms, and emerald ash borer threaten our investment in trees. The costs for 7
control and removal can be catastrophic and put pressure on city budgets. The Minnesota 8
Department of Natural Resources, through its Urban and Community Forestry program, and the 9
Minnesota Department of Agriculture, through its Shade Tree and Invasive Species program, 10
currently have regulatory authority to direct tree sanitation and control programs. Although these 11
programs allow for addressing some tree disease, pest, and other problems, funding levels have 12
been inadequate to meet the need of cities to build capacity for urban tree programs and respond to 13
catastrophic problems. Cities share the goal of the state’s Releaf Program—promoting and funding 14
the inventory, planning, planting, maintenance, and improvement of trees in cities throughout the 15
state. In addition, economic gains for stormwater management, tourism, recreation, and other 16
benefits must be protected from tree loss. A lack of timely investment in urban forests costs cities 17
significantly more in the long run. 18
Further, more and more cities are facing immediate costs for the identification, removal, 19
replacement, and treatment of emerald ash borer (EAB) as it spreads across the state. The state has 20
no program to assist cities in covering those expenses. 21
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports funding from the general fund or other 22
appropriate state funds for a state matching grant program to assist cities with building 23
capacity for urban forest management and meeting the costs of preparing for, and 24
responding to, catastrophic urban forest problems, including emerald ash borer. The state 25
should establish an ongoing grant program with at least $15 million per year that is usable 26
for those activities. 27
87
Specifically, direct grants to cities are desperately needed for the identification, removal, 1
replacement, and treatment of trees related to management of EAB. The state should 2
establish an ongoing grant program with at least $5 million per year that is usable for those 3
activities. 4
SD-72. City Pesticide Application Authority* 5
Issue: Current state law in Minn. Stat. § 18B.09 limits city authority to an ordinance requiring 6
warning signs after pesticide application. was amended in 2023 to allow cities of the first class to 7
prohibit the application or use of certain pesticides designated by the state as “pollinator-lethal,” 8
with a list of uses that would still be allowed. With many cities working to increase pollinator-9
friendly habitat and reduce the impact of pesticide usage known to be lethal to pollinators, cities 10
are seeking further tools to meet those public expectations. With small lot sizes, primarily non-11
agricultural property uses, increased state and local promotion of natural landscaping, and dense 12
residential concentrations, cities often find that the broader state pesticide regulations are not 13
adequately protective of pollinators and are seeking additional state authority to address these 14
issues in their communities. 15
Response: The state legislature should further amend Minn. Stat. § 18B.09 to allow cities of 16
any size to opt to restrict the application or use of Minnesota Department of Agriculture 17
designated pollinator-lethal pesticides within their community and require the Minnesota 18
Department of Agriculture to maintain a list of which pesticides include pollinator protection 19
boxes in their labeling or precautionary pollinator or bee warnings in the environmental 20
hazards section of their labeling. 21
SD-73. Election Issues* 22
Issue: Cities play an important role in administering state and federal election law and conducting 23
voting activities. 24
Response: To strengthen the effectiveness of elections administration, the Legislature should: 25
88
a) Seek the input of cities, townships, counties, and school districts on proposed changes to 1
voter registration, election law, and needed improvements and updates to the Statewide 2
Voter Registration System; 3
b) Amend the timeline for candidate filings in cities without a primary so that the final day 4
of filing is prior to the August primary date and align the date when city and school 5
district ballot questions must be submitted to the county to match the close of candidate 6
filing; 7
c) Expedite court action to resolve candidate eligibility related to residency in errors and 8
omissions proceedings; and 9
d) Eliminate redundant audio testing of assistive voting technology and equipment by 10
election judges in precinct polling places on Election Day; and 11
d)e) Increasing flexibility for elections administrators to purchase assistive voting 12
equipment and technology that best meets the needs of voters with disabilities. 13
e)f) Support local governments with ongoing and sufficient funding through the Voting 14
Operations, Technology, and Election Resources Account (VOTER) fund to provide 15
cities with resources to conduct elections and meet the mandated requirements set forth 16
in statute. to upgrade dated and aging elections equipment and provide accessibility 17
measures at polling places. 18
SD-74. Administering Absentee Balloting and Early Voting* 19
Issue: Eligible voters in Minnesota may vote by absentee ballot prior to Election Day. Starting 46 20
days before the election, a voter can request an application for an absentee ballot and, if approved, 21
receive and cast an absentee ballot in one visit to their county or city election offices. Ballots can 22
also be requested, applied for and received by mail and returned by the voter to the election office 23
by 3:00 pm on Election Day or by 8:00 pm on Election Day if delivered by mail or package 24
delivery. Absentee balloting results are not known until combined with polling place results when 25
the polls close on Election Day. 26
89
The process for voting by absentee ballot in-person was changed during the 2023 legislative 1
session to establish early voting for the 18 days leading up to an election. Early voting will replace 2
direct balloting, allowing voters to vote in person as they would on election day without filling out 3
an absentee ballot application. Until early voting is implemented the direct balloting timeline has 4
also been extended to the 18 days leading up to an election. The law also established additional 5
non-business hours that cities administering absentee balloting must be open for early voting, 6
including extended evening hours on the Tuesday before the election and required weekend hours 7
for the two Saturdays and one Sunday leading up to election day. While the extended timeline for 8
early voting allows for additional time to process absentee ballots and the early voting process 9
creates some efficiencies, the mandated extended hours require additional staff and resources for 10
cities that administer absentee balloting. 11
For those voting absentee in-person, the absentee ballot application process is burdensome and 12
confusing as voters expect the same process they encounter in their polling place on Election Day. 13
The application process should be replaced by having the voter verify their identity on a paper or 14
electronic roster. Currently electronic signatures are not allowed by state law; having the authority 15
to use electronic signatures would make the process more efficient. Streamlining the voter check-16
in procedures would increase efficiency and decrease the time voters spend in line waiting to cast 17
their absentee ballot. 18
Minn. Stat. § 203B.121, subd. 4 stipulates that at the close of business on the seventh day before 19
Election Day, elections administrators can begin processing absentee ballots received by mail and 20
accepted. At the beginning of the seventh day before Election Day, in-person absentee voters can 21
place their ballots directly into a tabulator (Minn. Stat. § 203B.081, subd. 3). If a voter who has 22
voted absentee prior to the seventh day before Election Day wishes to “claw back” their ballot and 23
receive a new ballot, they are able to do so through the seventh day. Once direct balloting begins, a 24
voter should no longer be able to “claw back” a ballot. Additionally, opening absentee ballots that 25
have been accepted should begin at the beginning of the day on the seventh day before Election 26
Day. 27
For those who vote absentee in-person prior to the seven 18 days before Election Day, there is 28
confusion and in some cases, frustration that they are not allowed to place their ballots directly into 29
90
a tabulator. To match the voter experience to be the same as they would experience on election day 1
and respond to the voter demand to vote early, this time period should be increased from seven to 2
the full 46 days before Election Day. Additionally, a A voter can request to place their ballot in a 3
series of envelopes similar to those returned by mail to be processed after they have left the 4
building. Few, if any, voters request to place their ballot into envelopes. 5
State law allows alternative sites for conducting absentee balloting but requires that these sites 6
remain open for the full 46 days prior to Election Day. For some jurisdictions, staffing alternative 7
sites for the full 46 days is not efficient as these sites may be underutilized until closer to Election 8
Day. Cities should be able to determine the length of time most appropriate for alternative sites to 9
meet the voting demands of their residents. As required by state law, voters would maintain the 10
ability to vote in-person absentee during the full 46-day period at city halls. 11
Current law allows for in-person absentee voting until 5:00 p.m. on the day before Election Day. 12
This does not leave adequate time for election officials to process absentee ballots, prepare 13
supplemental lists indicating which voters have already cast absentee ballots and deliver the lists to 14
precincts prior to opening of the polls on Election Day. The current absentee voting process further 15
requires that additional supplemental lists of final absentee voters be delivered to the polls after the 16
last mail delivery on Election Day and often leads to administrative challenges and increased 17
potential for errors in the process. 18
There are several methods a voter can utilize to vote in each election. In addition to the 46-day 19
absentee voting period in which a voter may request a ballot by mail, a voter can also vote before 20
election day through direct balloting and early voting, vote during the extended hours required on 21
the Tuesday before a general election or the three weekend days required before a general election, 22
or a voter can vote on election day. Reviews of available voter participation data and anecdotal 23
observation by city clerks on in-person absentee participation prior to the 18th day indicate that it 24
accounts for as little as a tenth or less of total turnout in a given election. While Minnesota has a 25
long absentee balloting time, the most popular days for early voting are the 18 days before the 26
election. With the many opportunities provided to voters, including the new extended early voting 27
period, requiring all cities to conduct in-person absentee voting before the direct balloting and 28
early voting timeline begins may not be the most efficient use of resources for all cities. In most 29
91
cases, decisions made in partnership between cities and counties on appropriate service levels for 1
absentee voting tend to work best as local jurisdictions best know their communities and trends 2
regarding the demand for in-person voting. 3
As more and more voters choose to vote early with absentee balloting, improvements must be 4
made to increase efficiency of administering absentee balloting before Election Day, reduce the 5
potential for errors, and to improve voter experience. 6
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports: 7
a) Removing the paper application requirement for in-person absentee voters and allow 8
voters the option to apply electronically; 9
b) Amending state statute to allow elections administrators to begin processing accepted 10
absentee ballots when direct balloting begins at the beginning of the seventh day before 11
Election Day and subsequently, concluding the “claw back” period at the close of 12
business the day before; 13
c) Increasing the time period that an in-person absentee voter can place their ballot directly 14
into a tabulator from seven to 46 days; 15
d)a) Eliminating the option to place an in-person absentee ballot in a series of envelopes 16
instead of a tabulator; 17
e) Allowing alternative in-person absentee voting sites to be established for less than the full 18
46 days currently required by state law; 19
b) Establishing an earlier deadline for ending in-person absentee voting; 20
f)c) Allowing cities to only conduct early voting and opt-out of in-person absentee voting 21
before the early voting period. 22
d) Revising absentee ballot regulations to allow any person 18 and older to witness the 23
absentee process and sign the envelope as a witness; and 24
92
g)e) Providing ongoing resources to cities that administer absentee balloting and early 1
voting for the extended early voting period and additional weekend hours required 2
during a general election. 3
SD-75. Loss of Felon Voting Rights* 4
Issue: There is confusion as to when voting rights are restored to those convicted of a felony, and 5
notification of restoration is inconsistent or nonexistent. This very often leads to challenges placed 6
on Election Day rosters for those convicted of a felony who are not eligible to vote and election 7
judges must then challenge the voter and spend time and resources determining a voter’s 8
eligibility. It would be much clearer if the loss of voting rights occurred only when a person is 9
incarcerated. 10
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities opposes the loss of voting rights for those 11
convicted of a felony who serve the entirety of their sentence in the community and are not 12
incarcerated. If incarcerated, the League of Minnesota Cities supports the restoration of 13
voting rights to those convicted of a felony once they have completed their term of 14
incarceration. This will eliminate the administrative burden of challenging voters at the polls 15
and determining eligibility from various jurisdictions. This will also eliminate the need for 16
investigation by local law enforcement of those who have unknowingly registered to vote or 17
voted before their rights were restored. 18
SD-76. Write-in Candidates in City Elections* 19
Issue: For federal, state and county offices, write-in candidates are totaled together as one number 20
for write-in votes. If a candidate wants the write-in votes to be individually recorded, the candidate 21
must file a written request with the Secretary of State no later than seven days before the general or 22
special Election Day. This provides any declared write-in candidate the same provisions for 23
tabulation as a candidate whose name is printed on the ballot. Because this requirement does not 24
exist in city elections, city election officials are required to take considerable time and resources to 25
count and individually record write-in votes cast, many of which are frivolous. 26
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports legislation to: 27
93
a) give cities the option to require that write-in candidates for local elective offices file a 1
formal request with the chief election official at least seven days before the city election if 2
they wish to have their write-in votes individually recorded; and 3
b) allow the city clerk to only compile and report write-in votes for specific candidates if the 4
total number of write-in votes for an office is greater than or equal to the number of votes 5
received by the candidate appearing on the ballot receiving the fewest number of votes. 6
SD-77. Ranked Choice Voting* 7
Issue: Current law allows charter cities to consider and adopt Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) as an 8
alternative voting method in local elections. State statute does not extend this authority to statutory 9
cities. Additionally, there are no statewide standards for conducting RCV. The lack of consistent 10
guidelines on how to effectively implement a RCV system imposes significant challenges for 11
election administrators and voters. 12
The Office of the Secretary of State certifies voting systems for cities and counties across the state. 13
This process does not include the systems used for RCV elections. This makes it difficult for cities 14
to access voting systems approved by the state. 15
Minn. Stat. § 204D.11 and 206.90 require the use of one ballot only for a state general election 16
unless there is a need for a separate judicial ballot. To allow cities that have implemented RCV to 17
hold municipal elections in conjunction with a state general election, state statute must be amended 18
to allow for more than one ballot. 19
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports: 20
a) Legislation that would give statutory cities the same authority given to charter cities to 21
consider and adopt RCV. Any legislation should address and resolve any challenges with 22
RCV elections that run concurrently with other elections; 23
b) Statewide standards for those cities that choose to adopt RCV to ensure it is implemented 24
consistently throughout the state to give voters confidence in the fairness of the 25
alternative process of casting their ballots and in the outcome of such elections; 26
94
c) A state certification process for voting systems used in tabulating RCV elections; and 1
d) Allowing for the use of more than one ballot should a city with RCV conduct a municipal 2
election in conjunction with a state general election. 3
SD-78. Voter Assistance* 4
Issue: Increasingly, voters may need assistance with language translation. Currently state statute 5
does not allow for the hiring of language interpreters for the sole purpose of assisting voters with 6
ballot language interpretation; they must also be trained as and serve as election judges. This limits 7
the availability and access to language interpretation for voters. 8
The federal Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) provides the legal 9
basis for absentee voting requirements for U.S. citizens who are active members of the Uniformed 10
Services, the Merchant Marine, and the commissioned corps of the Public Health Service and the 11
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, their eligible family members and U.S citizens 12
residing outside of the United States. This process allows a voter to complete a ballot 13
electronically and then return it via mail. Voters with disabilities may have assistive technology 14
within their homes that best meets their needs. Allowing them to receive a ballot electronically, 15
similarly to UOCAVA voters, would subsequently allow them to complete their ballot utilizing 16
their own personal assistive technology. State statute does not allow a voter to complete a ballot 17
electronically. 18
As election equipment and assistive technology continues to evolve, it is critical that local 19
elections administrators have flexibility in purchasing equipment and technology that will best 20
meet the needs of voters within their communities. 21
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the ability of elections administrators to 22
respond to the needs of voters who may benefit from assistance to ensure the greatest level of 23
participation by those eligible to vote. This includes: 24
a) Allowing the hiring of second language interpreters to staff polling places; 25
b) Extending electronic voting to people with disabilities; and 26
95
c) Increasing flexibility for elections administrators to purchase assistive voting equipment 1
and technology that best meets the needs of voters with disabilities. 2
SD-79. Electronic Rosters 3
Issue: While electronic rosters (or “e-poll books”) may increase efficiency and decrease cost for 4
some cities, this may not be true for all. As cities explore the use of electronic rosters, data 5
collected from the Office of the Secretary of State and from jurisdictions that have used the 6
technology, may be helpful in determining next steps and to improve the process. Currently when 7
a voter verifies their identity at a polling place via an electronic roster, they sign a paper form. 8
State law does not allow voters to sign the e-poll book. 9
Response: As the Legislature continues to examine the use of electronic rosters, cities should 10
retain the option of utilizing this technology but should not be required to do so. If cities 11
choose to use e-poll books, the use of electronic signatures should be allowed to increase 12
efficiency. To ensure there is a paper copy of the signatures, the receipts printed by the 13
electronic rosters should include a copy of the voter’s signature. 14
SD-80. Election Judge Recruitment and Retention 15
Issue: Nearly 30,000 Minnesotans serve as election judges. The recruitment and retention of 16
election judges is a significant and essential component of administering elections throughout the 17
State of Minnesota. 18
State statute requires that precincts with more than 500 registered voters be assigned at least four 19
election judges and those with fewer than 500 registered voters be assigned at least three election 20
judges. Minn. Stat. § 204B.21 requires that at least two election judges in each precinct serve with 21
a different major political party designation, except for student trainee election judges. The 22
remaining election judges in a precinct can serve without an affiliation to a major political party 23
and no more than half the judges in a precinct may belong to the same major political party. 24
Statute specifically requires election judge party balance to perform four polling place activities: 25
assisting a voter in curbside voting; opening the ballot box; duplicating ballots; and in conducting 26
96
an election at a Healthcare Facility. Political party affiliation is also unnecessary in city special 1
elections when offices on the ballot are nonpartisan. 2
Minn. Stat. § 204B.19 allows high school students to be excused from school to serve as a trainee 3
election judge if the student submits a written request signed and approved by the student's parent 4
or guardian to be absent from school and a certificate from the appointing authority stating the 5
hours during which the student will serve as a trainee election judge to the principal of the school 6
at least ten days prior to the election. This process is not currently extended to college students 7
which has proven to be a barrier for recruiting college students to serve as election judges. 8
Additionally, teachers and college faculty are also allowed to take time off of work to serve as an 9
election judge. 10
Response: To ensure state requirements are met, party balance is maintained, and to expand 11
the opportunity of serving as an election judge to others, the League of Minnesota Cities 12
supports the following changes: 13
a) Authorize college students to get time off from classes if they have been appointed to 14
serve as an election judge; 15
b) Allow for one election judge affiliated with any major political party defined in Minn. 16
Stat. § 200.02, subd. 7 or minor political party in Minn. Stat. § 200.02, subd. 23 to 17
perform an election activity that requires party balance specifically outlined in statute 18
and based on the election judge’s oath that all will perform duties in a fair and impartial 19
manner and not attempt to create an advantage for any party or candidate. If partisan 20
requirements cannot be met because of late staffing changes in the polling place, then 21
cities should be allowed to meet party balance through an election judge who has not 22
declared a party affiliation; and 23
c) Require major political parties to provide updated lists of persons interested in serving as 24
election judges directly to cities and counties and on an ongoing basis so that recruitment 25
lists are timely to best assist cities in meeting party balance requirements. 26
97
SD-81. Mail Balloting* 1
Issue: Minn. Stat. § 204B.45 authorizes all non-metropolitan townships and cities with less than 2
400 registered voters located outside of the Minneapolis/St. Paul seven-county metropolitan area 3
to hold elections by mail. A city may conduct mail balloting for an individual precinct having 4
fewer than 100 registered voters, subject to the approval of the county auditor. 5
Staffing and equipment needs can be very costly and mail balloting is an efficient way of 6
conducting an election for cities that have lower numbers of registered voters regardless of 7
location in or outside the metro area. It is not uncommon for the redistricting process to create very 8
small precincts in the metro area that are more cost-effectively served by a mail balloting process. 9
Additionally, for special elections that historically have lower turnout, mail balloting could 10
increase voter participation. 11
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports allowing all cities to conduct mail 12
balloting. 13
SD-82. Modernizing Charter Amendment Process 14
Issue: Minn. Stat. § 410.12 outlines the process for amending city charters and one of the methods 15
is citizen petition and Minn. Rules 8205 provides specific criteria for formatting. City staff then 16
review the petition to determine if it is valid and has met statutory requirements for completion and 17
submission. To ensure that both citizens and city staff fully understand the requirements, clarifying 18
changes should be made. 19
Response: To improve the process for amending a city charter, the League of Minnesota 20
Cities supports: 21
a) Adding clarifying language regarding “registered voters”. These voters must be eligible 22
voters in the district for which the petition is being circulated who are in active status on 23
the statewide registration system at the time of petition verification and have not had a 24
name or address change since the most recent voter registration application was 25
submitted. 26
98
b) Ensuring that petitioners have access to the petition, public information lists used to 1
verify registered voters, and the examination log available for inspection on request of 2
any registered voter. 3
c) Revising Minn. Rules 8205 to ensure that formatting requirements are clear and up to 4
date. 5
SD-83. Presidential Nomination Primary 6
Issue: In 2016, the legislature passed into law a process for the state of Minnesota to conduct a 7
presidential nomination primary in 2020 for president of the United States. This is administered by 8
cities and counties much the same way elections are conducted. 9
Minn. Stat. § 207A.15 provides a process for local units of government to be reimbursed for 10
expenses incurred from conducting the primary. The Office of the Secretary of State (OSS) 11
submits to the Department of Management and Budget (MMB) an estimated cost of administering 12
the primary, and MMB provides funding to the OSS. That funding is then distributed to local units 13
of government as a reimbursement based on expense reporting submitted to the OSS. Because the 14
presidential nomination primary is a partisan activity administered on behalf of political parties, it 15
is critical that local units of government be reimbursed fully and that no cost be borne by cities. 16
Additionally, conducting a primary election by mail could conserve resources and potentially 17
increase voter participation. 18
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports: 19
a) Ensuring that local units of government are fully reimbursed for all anticipated and 20
unanticipated costs of conducting the presidential nomination primary; and 21
b) Allowing the presidential nomination primary to be conducted via mail balloting. 22
SD-84. Health Care Facility Voting* 23
Issue: Minn. Stat. § 203B.11 outlines the process for individuals living in health care facilities to 24
vote. Local election officials send teams of election judges to facilities such as nursing homes and 25
hospitals during the 20 35 days before the election. They distribute ballots to eligible residents of 26
99
the facility and provide assistance as needed. Allowing more time for this process would increase 1
resident ability to register to vote or apply for an absentee ballot and ensure their ballot is 2
submitted. 3
There have been instances when facility staff have refused entry to city elections officials to 4
provide health care facility outreach voting. It is essential that city staff are able to provide this 5
service to ensure that every eligible resident is able to vote should they choose to. 6
It is not uncommon for residents of health care facilities to move to different rooms or units within 7
a building. If their voter registration is tied to a specific unit within the building, they must re-8
register to vote after moving or their ballot may be rejected. This is unnecessary given the resident 9
still lives in the same facility. 10
The process for health care facility voting is required in precincts that conduct elections by mail. 11
This is confusing for residents and facility staff. This requirement should be eliminated in mail-12
only precincts though elections administrators should work to ensure that any new resident of a 13
facility is able to register and receive a ballot. 14
Response: It is critical that those living in health care facilities are able to vote securely and 15
with minimal complication. To do so, the League of Minnesota Cities supports amending 16
state law to increase flexibility for cities and health care facilities partnering in administering 17
elections. This includes: 18
a) Extending the time period that clerks are required to administer health care facility 19
voting up to 46 days before an election to coincide with the start of absentee voting 20
instead of the pre-registration deadline.; 21
b) Requiring entry into facility for city elections officials to ensure residents are able to vote; 22
c) Eliminating the need to include a specific room or unit number on voter registration or 23
absentee ballot applications of those living in health care facilities; and 24
d) Exempting mail-only precincts from also conducting health care facility voting while 25
ensuring that new residents are able to register and receive a ballot. 26
100
SD-85. Voters Experiencing Homelessness 1
Issue: Minnesotans experiencing homelessness are able to register to vote using the location of 2
where they usually sleep as defined in Minn. Stat. § 200.031. This could be an intersection or 3
shelter address. Because the voter does not have a permanent mailing address, the registration is 4
often challenged which then requires a voter to re-register each election. This process also requires 5
a registered voter in the precinct to vouch for that person which can be difficult to find when 6
experiencing homelessness. 7
For those experiencing homelessness, leaving their space and any belongings can potentially mean 8
losing them. This becomes a significant barrier to registering to vote and participating in elections. 9
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the following to improve the process for 10
voters experiencing homelessness to safely and securely vote. 11
a) Update Minn. Stat § 200.031 to allow an eligible voter to designate a residential address 12
or the address of a facility or residential shelter, such as homeless shelter or woman’s 13
shelter, that assists people experiencing homelessness where their official election mail 14
may be sent and have that serve as the address for assigning a precinct and polling 15
location. 16
b) Allow cities to do outreach in areas with concentrated populations of those experiencing 17
homelessness to register people to vote, assist with applications for absentee ballots, and 18
issue and receive ballots in a process similar to Health Care Facility outreach. 19
SD-86. Voter Registration 20
Issue: While registering to vote is the most critical step an eligible voter must complete prior to 21
casting a ballot, it remains a complicated process and barrier to new voters. Procedures currently 22
utilized in the state have largely remained unchanged for many election cycles and fail to account 23
for changes in population demographics and increasing demands for non-traditional voting 24
methods. 25
101
Minn. Stat. § 201.061 currently stipulates that eligible voters may either register to vote no less 1
than 20 days prior to an election or on Election Day at their polling place. In addition to 2
completing the necessary paperwork, a potential voter is required to provide proof of identity and 3
residence. One option for proof of residence is to have a registered voter from the same voting 4
precinct vouch for the eligible voter. 5
The vouching process is a vital option for voters lacking current documentation but remains 6
challenging. While voters very likely know people in their neighborhood, this does not guarantee 7
they reside in the same voting precinct. Local roads are often used to divide voting precincts, thus 8
putting neighbors across the street in different precincts. This issue is even more prevalent for 9
voters experiencing homelessness where vouching is often the only viable option for registering. 10
Expanding the eligible vouching list to those who reside in the same city would provide further 11
flexibility to voters and allow election officials to still track the limit of 8 vouches per person. 12
Under Minn. Rules 8200.5100 the Secretary of State defines the list of acceptable documents that 13
voters may use for proof of residence. While there are many options currently authorized, many 14
comparable or similar documents are not currently allowed. The lack of consistency creates a great 15
deal of confusion for voters as to why documents providing the same information are not treated 16
the same. New emerging industries and services are also not accounted for. Consideration should 17
be given to adding documents like work paystubs, tax returns, mortgage closing paperwork, non-18
standard lease/rental agreements (Hotels, AirBnB, group homes), a social service agency letter 19
describing where a homeless voter lives, USPS address change verification, and other documents 20
issued by government entities. 21
Additionally, under Minn. Rules 8200.5100, voters may present bills due or dated within 30 days 22
of Election Day to meet proof of residence requirements. This timetable can be problematic when 23
the absentee voting period starts 46-days prior to the election. The 30-day window around Election 24
Day often results in some voters not having a current enough bill to register in the first few weeks 25
of absentee voting. It can be confusing for voters as to why their most current bill is not accepted 26
as proof of residence. Having a start date coincide with the start of absentee voting would provide 27
more voters access and remove confusion on the different deadlines. 28
102
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports modernizing current voter registration 1
procedures such as: 2
a) Expanding eligible vouchers to any registered voter in the same city. 3
b) Expanding the list of acceptable documents that can be used for proof of residence. 4
c) Expanding the current 30-day window for original bills that voters may utilize for 5
registration to coincide with the 46-day absentee voting period.6
103
SD-NEW A. Operation of Electric Assisted Bicycles* 1
Issue: Minn. Stat. § 169.222 treats electric assisted bicycles, or ebikes, as defined in Minn. Stat. § 2
169.011, subd. 27, with maximum capable speeds up to 28 miles per hour similarly to bicycles in 3
terms of rights and duties. The law provides limited local control and prohibits any person under 4
the age of 15 from operating them. Conversely, Minn. Stat. § 169.223 and 171.02, subd. 3, require 5
a driver’s license or motorized bicycle permit to operate motorized bicycles, which are defined in 6
in Minn. Stat. § 169.011, subd. 45, as having maximum capable speeds of 30 miles per hour. 7
With the advancements in ebike technology to provide similar maximum speeds as motorized 8
bicycles the differences between the two are semantic and there is no public safety difference with 9
their similar urban road speed capabilities. 10
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports modifying state statute to include the 11
same driver’s license or motorized bicycle/electric assisted bicycle permit for ebikes as it 12
currently does for motorized bicycles. The required permit training should advance ebike 13
rider safety. Ebike riders under 18 should be required to wear protective headgear just as is 14
currently required for motorized bicycle riders. The minimum age for both ebike and 15
motorized bicycle operation should remain 15 years old. No passengers should be allowed on 16
an ebike unless it was originally designed to safely carry more than one rider. Providing law 17
officers with better options for reasonable suspicion stops and violation citations will help to 18
prevent accidents and tragedies.19
104
IMPROVING LOCAL ECONOMIES
LE-1. Growth Management and Annexation 1
Issue: Unplanned and uncontrolled growth has a negative environmental, fiscal, and 2
governmental impact on cities, counties, and the state because it increases the cost of providing 3
government services and results in the loss of natural resource areas and prime agricultural land. 4
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities believes the existing framework for guiding 5
growth and development primarily through local plans and controls adopted by local 6
governments should form the basis of a statewide planning policy, and that the state should 7
not adopt a mandatory comprehensive statewide planning process. Rather, the state 8
should: 9
a) Provide additional financial and technical assistance to local governments for 10
cooperative planning and growth management issues, particularly where new 11
comprehensive plans have been mandated by the Legislature; 12
b) Keep comprehensive planning timelines on a ten-year cycle due to the financial and 13
workload impacts these processes place on cities; 14
c) Clearly establish the public purposes served by existing statewide controls, such as 15
shore land zoning and wetlands conservation; clarify, simplify, and streamline these 16
controls; eliminate duplication in their administration; and fully defend and hold 17
harmless any local government sued for a “taking” as a result of executing state land-18
use policies; 19
d) Give cities broader authority to extend their zoning, subdivision, and other land-use 20
controls outside the city’s boundaries, regardless of the existence of county or township 21
controls, to ensure conformance with city facilities and services; 22
e) Clearly define and differentiate between urban and rural development and restrict 23
urban growth without municipal services or annexation agreements outside city 24
boundaries. This should contain a requirement that counties and joint power districts 25
105
that provide sewer, water, and other services, which have been traditionally provided 1
by cities, include as a condition of providing service the annexation of properties that 2
are the recipients of such services in cases where annexation is requested by a city that 3
could feasibly be providing those services; 4
f) Facilitate the annexation of urban land to cities by amending state statutes that regulate 5
annexation to make it easier for cities to annex developed or developing land within 6
unincorporated areas; 7
g) Oppose legislation that would reinstate the election requirement in contested 8
annexations; 9
h) Support legislation to prohibit detachment of parcels from cities unless approval of the 10
detachment has been granted by both the affected city and township and the affected 11
county has been notified prior to the city and township acting on the request; 12
i) Oppose legislation that allows orderly annexation agreements to be adopted that 13
prohibit annexation by other cities of property not being annexed under the agreement; 14
j) Encourage ideas consistent with the long-term goal of allowing urban development only 15
in areas currently or about to become urban or suburban in character; and 16
k) Establish stricter criteria on the amount cities can pay to townships as part of an 17
orderly annexation agreement so that payments to townships are limited to 18
reimbursement for lost property tax base for no more than a fixed number of years, 19
documented stranded assessments, and other items for which there is a clear nexus. 20
LE-2. Wildlife Management Areas 21
Issue: The Department of Natural Resources has been pressing for legislative requirements 22
creating development restrictions on property adjacent to land purchased by the state for hunting 23
and other conservation purposes. This issue has been increasingly controversial as urban growth 24
extends into areas previously considered rural and residential property owners are finding 25
themselves adjacent to public hunting land. With large amounts of new revenue going into state 26
106
land purchase for game and fish habitat and public access purposes because of the passage of the 1
constitutional amendment, these problems could occur even more frequently. 2
The solution being proposed will put local governments in the position of enforcing state land 3
use restrictions and would require extensive changes to local plans, controls and ordinances. It 4
would also create large numbers of nonconformities on properties within city limits and would 5
make state wildlife management areas far less desirable due to impacts on future city 6
development. 7
In rural areas, where this is less of a concern, counties and townships have the authority to object 8
to the state purchasing land for the outdoor recreation system for these very reasons. Cities do 9
not have that statutory right. Due to recent statutory changes (Minn. Stat. § 97A.137, subd. 4) 10
removing city authority to adopt ordinances related to firearm discharge, hunting and trapping 11
activity in wildlife management areas within their borders, these purchases should not occur 12
without city consent and input. 13
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities opposes the state imposing retroactive 14
development restrictions around existing wildlife management areas. 15
When purchasing state wildlife management areas and other conservation and outdoor 16
recreation system land, the state should either purchase sufficient land to provide an 17
internal buffer from surrounding development or purchase development rights to land 18
adjacent to the property if such a buffer is deemed essential to preserving the intended uses 19
for the property. This should be required for new land purchases and done where feasible 20
for existing wildlife management areas. 21
Furthermore, Minn. Stat. § 84.944 and § 97A.145 should be amended to include cities in 22
the local government notification and approval process the state must follow before 23
purchasing public land. 24
LE-3. Official State Mapping Responsibility 25
Issue: For many years, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has provided the 26
mapping services to keep survey-level accuracy in place for the state’s official maps and records. 27
107
That information changes when roads are made or improved, and needs regular adjustment when 1
municipal boundary adjustments are made. The information is then used at all levels of 2
government to accurately determine property boundaries for transportation aid, utility service 3
boundaries, state and local funding formulas, election issues, and a number of other uses. 4
No state agency, however, has ever been statutorily provided with mapping responsibility and 5
MnDOT is not funded for providing that level of detail in its mapping. Because MnDOT, as an 6
agency, requires less specificity in its maps, a change has slowly been integrated to mostly 7
restrict MnDOT mapping to what changes occur in road ownership and responsibility, leaving 8
many mapping needs unmet for other users of boundary data. 9
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports legislation making a named state entity 10
the official provider of survey-level mapping for the state, including maps for municipal 11
boundary adjustments. The Legislature must provide the necessary appropriations to the 12
entity for providing that service. 13
LE-4. Electric Service Extension 14
Issue: Minnesota law preserves the right of municipal electric utilities to grow with the cities 15
they serve. Municipal electric utilities may grow either through application to the Minnesota 16
Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) or through condemnation proceedings. Eliminating 17
authority of municipal electric utilities to extend services, or making extension of municipal 18
electric service to annexed property unreasonably costly, would interfere with community 19
development and make it unfeasible for municipal electric utilities to serve properties located 20
within rural electric cooperative (REC) or other electric service provider service territory in 21
annexed areas, even if the REC or other electric utility had not served them prior to annexation. 22
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities opposes any attempt to remove or alter the 23
eminent domain option available to municipal electric utilities in state law, or to make it 24
financially unfeasible for municipal utilities to compensate rural electric cooperatives or 25
other electric utilities for serving future customers who reside in annexed areas where that 26
electric utility has not provided service. 27
108
LE-5. Statutory Approval Timelines 1
Issue: Cities since 1995 have been required to act on written requests relating to zoning, septic 2
systems, the expansion of Metropolitan Urban Service Areas (MUSA), and other land-use 3
applications in accordance with a statutory time period generally referred to as the 60-day rule. 4
Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 15.99, state and local government agencies must approve or deny a 5
permit within a statutory timeframe. Failure by the agency to issue a specific denial of the 6
application is deemed an approval. 7
Minn. Stat. § 15.99 does not directly address whether an appeal of a decision triggers an 8
extension or is part of an original zoning request that must be handled within the 60- or 120-day 9
time period. In a 2004 Minnesota Court of Appeals decision, the court found that a zoning 10
application is not approved or denied for the purposes of Minn. Stat. § 15.99 until the city has 11
resolved all appeals challenging the application. Moreno v. City of Minneapolis, 676 N.W.2d 1 12
(Minn. Ct. App. 2004). According to the court, an appeal is not a request for a permit, license or 13
other governmental approval; therefore, it does not trigger a new 60-day time period. Under this 14
interpretation, a decision rendered by a zoning board or planning commission is not the final 15
approval or denial of an application if the city allows an appeal to the city council. 16
This court decision is problematic for a couple of reasons. Forcing cities to further condense the 17
process for considering planning and zoning applications will make it more difficult to gather 18
public input and leave less time for thoughtful deliberation by zoning boards and planning 19
commissions. It may also provide an incentive for cities to extend the original 60-day period in 20
every instance in order to build-in adequate time to consider possible appeals. 21
The Minnesota Supreme Court recently issued another 60-day rule decision that held that an 22
application to the Minneapolis Heritage Preservation Commission for a certificate of 23
appropriateness was a “written request related to zoning,” and therefore was subject to the 24
automatic approval provision of the 60-day rule. 500, LLC v. City of Minneapolis, 837 N.W. 2d 25
287 (Minn. 2013). This opinion creates ambiguity and uncertainty about what permit 26
applications are subject to the law. 27
109
Additionally, the statute does not allow for exceptions to the timelines in event of extenuating 1
local circumstances. If a state of emergency limits the ability of city staff to complete the work, it 2
should not result in a de facto approval of applications. Clarification is needed about how these 3
instances are fairly handled to ensure a fair public process can occur for all interested and 4
involved parties. 5
While the Legislature has clarified some aspects of this law, additional modifications are 6
necessary to assist cities in providing accurate and timely responses to applicants and to allow 7
adequate time for public input. Furthermore, as city staff and financial resources are increasingly 8
limited, flexibility in the length of approval timeline requirements may be needed at the local 9
level. 10
Response: The Legislature should repeal or amend Minn. Stat. § 15.99. If repeal is unlikely, 11
amendments should: 12
a) Increase the initial time limit to 90 days or have the language in Minn. Stat. § 15.99 13
apply as the default requirement only in cases where permitting bodies have not 14
established an independent approval timeline; 15
b) Clarify that approval does not abrogate the need for approvals under other applicable 16
federal, state or local requirements; 17
c) Provide appeal rights to adjacent property owners; 18
d) Clarify that, if requests are to be decided by a board, commission or other agent of a 19
governmental agency, and the decision of the board, commission or other agent is 20
adopted subject to appeal to the governing body of the agency, then the agency may 21
extend the 60-day time limit to resolve the appeal; and 22
e) More clearly define that the phrase “related to zoning” refers to a traditional land use 23
decision such as rezoning, conditional use permits, and variances. 24
f) To address states of emergency, add the following new language to the statute: (h) The 25
time limits in subdivision 2 and 3 are paused if the governor declares a state of 26
emergency under section 12.31. In cases described in these paragraphs, the deadlines in 27
110
the areas included in the emergency declaration remain paused until ten days after the 1
expiration of the state of emergency, applied to any written application awaiting action 2
that was submitted prior to or during the state of emergency. 3
LE-6. Maintenance of Retaining Walls Adjacent to Public Rights of Way 4
Issue: The Minnesota Constitution grants cities the power to “levy and collect assessments for 5
local improvements upon property benefited hereby.” Retaining walls are one of the many 6
improvements that a city is authorized to make on behalf of its citizens, and Minnesota’s special 7
assessment law, Minn. Stat. ch. 429, authorizes cities to charge special assessments on properties 8
that are benefitted by an improvement. 9
The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the city of Minneapolis had a nondelegable duty of 10
lateral support to a property owner with a retaining wall abutting a city sidewalk. Howell v. City 11
of Minneapolis, 2013 WL 1707759 (April 22, 2013). A subsequent jury found that the city 12
created the need for lateral support when it built the street and sidewalk adjacent to the property, 13
making the city responsible for the maintenance the retaining wall, despite the fact that the 14
property is clearly benefitted by the retaining wall. 15
The special assessment statute anticipates the need for cities to create retaining walls when 16
making public improvements, and this holding could create significant costs for cities forced to 17
repair and maintain retaining walls that benefit a single property. A choice by a developer or 18
previous property owner to build a retaining wall to improve the value or usefulness of property 19
may appear to be necessary today, but determining who first created the need for lateral support 20
in the past can involve costly and time-consuming historical research that may not reveal a clear 21
answer. 22
Response: The Legislature should amend the special assessment statute so that retaining 23
walls needed to facilitate public improvements are treated the same as other local 24
improvements. In cases where retaining walls located along public rights of way or within 25
drainage and utility easements separate public improvements from adjacent properties, the 26
Legislature should establish a rebuttable presumption that the need for lateral support was 27
created by the property owner. 28
111
LE-7. Development Disputes 1
Issue: State law is clear that fees collected under Minn. Stat. ch. 462 are eligible for judicial 2
review in the event of dispute. The Legislature limited the timeframe during which an aggrieved 3
party may challenge planning and zoning fees to 60 days after approval of an application. 4
However, the law is not clear about what notice requirements to the municipality are necessary, 5
relative to the timing for a person aggrieved by an ordinance or decision under the municipal 6
planning act to seek review. 7
Response: The Legislature should amend Minn. Stat. § 462.361 to establish a 60-day time 8
limitation in which an aggrieved person may bring an action against the municipality. 9
LE-8. Foreclosure and Neighborhood Stabilization* 10
Issue: Cities dedicate scarce resources to address public safety and maintenance challenges 11
associated with foreclosed, vacant, and under-maintained homes. Left unaddressed, these 12
properties destabilize neighborhoods, depress neighborhood property values, and potentially 13
increase the costs of municipal services. Cities’ revenue also continues to decline due to 14
delinquent utility payments and property tax payments, as well as added costs for nuisance 15
abatements. Although the number of those mortgage foreclosures has stabilized somewhat since 16
the peak of the recession in 2008 and the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, issues surrounding 17
community recovery remain ongoing. 18
State and local governments can play an important role in spurring reinvestment in struggling 19
neighborhoods, but without additional resources to address the variety and costly impacts of 20
foreclosures and vacant properties, cities cannot maintain or increase those activities to meet 21
local needs. The federal government has provided funds for neighborhood stabilization and 22
direct mortgage assistance to residents, but such funds are limited in eligible uses and scope, and 23
they are only available to a limited number of cities. 24
Contracts for deed have been used to successfully buy and sell thousands of homes around 25
Minnesota. However, some property owners use contracts for deed as an alternative to a 26
traditional lease, even though the purchaser has no intention of buying the home. Some 27
112
communities have encountered a situation where a property owner is buying many homes in a 1
community, then selling them on contract for deed. This can allow a person to essentially act as 2
a landlord while evading a city’s rental inspection and rental licensing process, while the buyers 3
lose the traditional legal rights and protections as tenants. Many view it as a way to rent the 4
property and may not be aware of it being a contract for deed. 5
Numerous problems arise for cities and neighborhoods when property owners are acting 6
essentially as renters. It is difficult to determine who is responsible for maintaining the property 7
or for paying utility bills and property taxes, and cities may not be able to inspect substandard 8
properties if they are not subject to a lease agreement. In some situations, property owners may 9
wish to have a renter be the responsible party for utility bills and utilize contract for deed 10
arrangements to have the person living on the property be the responsible party. The property 11
may also not be recorded at the county for homesteading purposes if the buyer is not aware of the 12
formal change in ownership that results from a contract for deed. 13
In recent years, investor ownership of single-family housing stock has steadily increased as 14
investors including both small investors and large private equity companies have continued to 15
purchase large numbers of single-family homes to convert to residential rental uses. According to 16
the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank, investor-ownership rate for residential properties in the 17
metropolitan area has more than doubled since 2006from 2006 to 2015 but has since stabilized in 18
the past three years. While the The growing trend of investor ownership has stabilized, the 19
increase in single-family rental housing continues to impact city housing stock as investor 20
purchases of affordable single-family homes are often concentrated in lower income 21
neighborhood, which can remove homeownership opportunities and make it harder for lower-22
income households to compete in the housing market. While investor ownership creates single-23
family rental opportunities, strategies deployed by certain investors that seek to maximize profits 24
can lead to a deterioration of housing quality. 25
Response: The Legislature should: 26
a) Secure increased state and federal resources and provide financing tools to help cover 27
city costs associated with foreclosed and /or vacant properties, community revitalization 28
strategies, and community investment, including revenue sources for programs that 29
113
support foreclosure mitigation, homeownership counseling, and expanded 1
homeownership opportunities and are sustainable. 2
b) Explore additional city authority to Aallow cities to take more expedient actions 3
necessary to acquire tax forfeited property in order to protect foreclosed and/or vacant 4
homes from damage and to help preserve property values in neighborhoods where 5
concentrations of such conditions are present, including an expedited process to address 6
nuisance properties. 7
c) Reexamine the Contract for Deed statutes to mitigate predatory contract for deed 8
arrangements and ensure property owners adhere to local rental licensing 9
requirementsdetermine whether additional protections are necessary to prevent 10
property owners from evading responsibilities of a landlord, and provide local 11
jurisdictions resources to allow for education of future buyers and sellers in contract 12
for deed arrangements. 13
d) Support local authority for cities to collect all delinquent taxes, utility bills, liens, and 14
assessments on foreclosed, vacant, boarded and/or tax forfeited properties. 15
e) Improve notification to cities, and consistency in the information available to cities, 16
when a property is in the foreclosure process and vacated and advance policies that 17
make it easier for cities to step in during the tax forfeiture sale process in order to more 18
effectively address blighted properties. 19
f) Support coordinated responses to prevent foreclosures, activate and guide private 20
investment and home purchases, and support distressed neighborhoods. 21
g) Continue toSstudy and monitor the impacts on the housing market of investor-owned 22
homes and enact policy that provides cities with the tools to mitigate any negative 23
impacts on city housing stock and prospective homebuyers due to investor-owned 24
purchasing of homes without penalizing small investors and property owners. 25
h) Re-enact a program at the state level similar to “This Old House” to allow owners of 26
qualifying single-family homes or multi-unit rental properties to defer the increase in 27
114
tax capacity from repairs or improvements to their homestead property as an incentive 1
for cities to maintain housing stock or provide state assistance to cities who wish to 2
provide incentives for homeowners to make repairs and improvements to their 3
property. 4
i) Support programs that provide resources to cities for rehabilitation or new 5
construction of single-family homes, such as the Community Impact Fund and the 6
Community Fix Up Program currently administered through MN Housing Finance 7
Agency (MHFA).. 8
LE-9. Housing Policy* 9
Issue: Cities recognize that stable housing is essential to the health, safety, and welfare of 10
residents. Since the Fair Housing Act of 1968, and more recently with the recognition that 11
certain barriers to housing disparately impact certain members of our communities, local 12
government has been obligated to promote and reduce barriers to fair housing and equal 13
opportunity. For example, households with housing choice vouchers face many barriers to 14
securing housing in the private rental market, especially when rental vacancy rates are low. 15
Currently rental vacancy rates are at a historic low in much of the state. As a result, many 16
families and individuals may be unable to use their housing choice vouchers and thus unable to 17
secure safe, decent and affordable housing. Additionally, many renters and homeowners face 18
challenges from housing displacement due to rising costs, uninhabitable housing, and eviction 19
that exacerbates housing instability and homelessness. 20
Despite progress since the Fair Housing Act of 1968, households of color nevertheless 21
experience a gap in homeownership rates compared with white households and have faced 22
barriers to housing due to a history of housing policies and lending practices that 23
disproportionately benefit white households (i.e., application of GI bill largely only to white 24
soldiers returning from war, redlining, and restrictive covenants). According to the U.S. Census 25
Bureau and American Community Survey data, the homeownership rate in Minnesota for non-26
Hispanic White Americans has held consistently above 71%.is 78%, which is above the national 27
rate of 74.4% However, the homeownership rate for Black homeowners of color in Americans 28
Minnesota is 41.8%, which remains well below the lowest of all racial groupsnational black 29
115
homeownership rate of nationally at 41.8of 44 percent. Comparatively for Hispanic Americans, 1
the homeownership rate is around 47% and for Asian Americans, it has hovered around 53%. 2
According to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency analysis of the 2018 most recent U.S. 3
Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, Minnesota has one of the highest 4
homeownership rates in the nation, but the state has the fourth largest disparity in 5
homeownership rates between white/non-Hispanic households and households of color. 6
According to the most recent2018 U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, 7
households of color are also more likely to experience cost burden (paying more than 30% of 8
their income on housing). In Minnesota, 5740% of renter households of color experience cost 9
burden as compared to 2345.5% of white renter households. Project based and voucher based 10
rental assistance that enable renters to pay no more than 30% of their income on housing are 11
critical to reducing cost burden disparities. Nationally, according to data analysis provided by the 12
Urban Institute, only 1 in 5 households who qualify for a Section 8 voucher receive this critical 13
form of rental assistance. Despite legislative efforts in Minnesota to create a sustainable state 14
rental assistance program, the program is likely toState rental assistance programs are fall short 15
of addressing the need.underfunded and are only intended to serve as last resort efforts to prevent 16
homelessness. As a result, low-income families often make tradeoffs to reduce housing costs. 17
Families may choose or only be able to afford living in poor-quality, substandard housing or a 18
long distance from work opportunities to reduce housing costs. The imbalance between the 19
demand for affordable housing and the supply of low-cost rentals contributes to increasing 20
housing costs. At the same time, wages have remained stagnant and not kept up with increased 21
housing costs resulting in more and more families experiencing housing cost burden. Rent-22
burdened households have higher eviction rates, increased financial fragility, and wider use of 23
social safety net programs, compared with other renters and homeowners. The rates and severity 24
of rent burden, especially for households of color, have increased housing instability and resulted 25
in fewer households transitioning from renters to homeowners. 26
Response: The Legislature should: 27
a) Support resources and programs that seek to assist communities and landlords in their 28
efforts to reduce barriers to housing and promote fair housing and equal opportunity 29
116
including a prohibition on landlords denying housing opportunities to residents based 1
on their source of income and support efforts by the federal government to promote fair 2
housing policies intended to protect people from housing discrimination and encourage 3
the federal government to provide more flexibility within the Section 8 voucher 4
program so that renters can more readily maintain and place their vouchers in a tight 5
rental market. 6
b) Support housing stability for renters through policies that mitigate the impact of or 7
reduce evictions filed including providing clear statutory authority for cities who seek 8
to impose tenant protection ordinances that mitigate renter displacement. 9
c) Seek to identify and reduce racial disparities in homeownership in Minnesota and 10
support policies and encourage innovative solutions that address structural barriers for 11
people of color when it comes to accessing housing including policies that encourage fair 12
lending and provide homebuyer education and funding for down payment assistance to 13
low-income households. 14
d) Support programs that reduce cost burden among renters and support policies that 15
address barriers for people of color when accessing safe, healthy and decent quality 16
affordable rental housing. 17
d)e) Support resources and policies that encourage public-private partnerships between 18
cities and entities seeking to expand new affordable homeownership and rental 19
opportunities, prevent renter displacement, and reduce the racial gap in 20
homeownership and reduce cost burden. 21
LE-10. Resources for Affordable Housing* 22
Issue: Cities, along with local housing officials, are concerned about the need for proactive 23
commitment at the state level to aid cities to meet demand for affordable housing that is sensitive 24
to local conditions, emerging trends, and changing demographics. This includes meeting the 25
needs of lowest-income households as well as an aging population and ensuring a wide range of 26
lifecycle housing options that allow seniors of all incomes to stay in their community, addressing 27
117
racial disparity gaps in housing, and responding to emerging trends, such as the need to preserve 1
federally subsidized housing and naturally occurring (unsubsidized) affordable housing. The 2
League also recognizes that federal, state and local governments all have a role to play in 3
meeting affordable housing needs, overcoming barriers to housing stability such as high market 4
prices, eviction, and foreclosure, and responding to problems caused by vacant homes and the 5
increase in rental properties that are the result of foreclosure. 6
It is generally agreed that Minnesota has a substantial supply gap of housing units across the 7
housing spectrum, especially units that are affordable to lower income Minnesotans making 30% 8
of average median income or less. Housing for extremely low-income Minnesotans and 9
supportive housing with social services are particularly underserved by traditional market rate 10
housing providers and require committed ongoing operating funding along with initial capital 11
support. 12
A comprehensive report issued in 2018 by the then Governor’s Task Force on Housing 13
delineated 30 specific recommendations to help achieve six goals, including: commit to homes as 14
a priority; preserve the homes we have; build more homes; increase home stability; link homes 15
and services; and support and strengthen homeownership. The Task Force’s recommendations 16
were based upon input from various statewide stakeholders, local governments and residents and 17
renters impacted by the lack of affordable housing in this state. These recommendations provide 18
an important list of housing goals that should continue to be considered as cities work towards 19
addressing affordable housing issues in their communities. 20
Response: The Legislature should: 21
a) Support the affordable housing priorities of the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency 22
(MHFA) that benefit cities, which include making resources and methods available to 23
maintain and improve existing affordable homes, including publicly subsidized deeply 24
affordable, and housing stock that is aging such as naturally occurring (unsubsidized) 25
affordable housing. 26
b) Provide stable and long-term funding, including but not limited to dedicated funding 27
sources, for Minnesota Housing and other affordable housing programs that support 28
118
local housing efforts, including those that encourage innovation and recognize regional 1
markets, provides flexibility for cities to create partnerships and leverage resources 2
with private and public entities., such as:Support capital investment funding resources 3
for affordable and public housing, stable and long-term funding for supportive services 4
and programs that address homelessness and reduce barriers to stable housing and 5
homeownership, aconsistently fund the state housing tax credit program and 6
contribution fund or a state low-income housing tax credit to help rebuild the state’s 7
partnership with local governments and the private sector in the development of 8
homeownership, and multi-family rental assistance and housing renovation programs. 9
c) Consider establishing a program to address immediate needs throughout the year to 10
provide a match for new or existing city-supported affordable housing projects. This 11
could include matching funds, issued on a timeline that is consistent with local 12
budgeting processes, for local revenues allocated to a local affordable housing trust 13
fund. 14
d) Expand authority for all cities to transfer unobligated pooled increment from a housing 15
or redevelopment TIF district to support a local housing trust fund for any eligible 16
expenditure under Minn. Stat. § 462C.16. 17
e) Substantially increase long-term funding for the Economic Development & Challenge 18
Fund to leverage local private and public resources to develop workforce rental and 19
single-family homes. 20
f) Support legislation to provide sales, use, and transaction tax exemptions or reductions 21
for development and production of affordable housing and use state bond proceeds for 22
land banking and trusts as well as rehabilitation and construction of affordable 23
housing. 24
g) Provide funding and financing tools to cities to create affordable senior housing for our 25
aging population. 26
h) Provide funding and financing tools to cities to create affordable housing and prevent 27
foreclosure for veterans. 28
119
i) Support for funding to reduce the racial gap in homeownership rates, such as targeted 1
homeownership capacity building and homebuyer assistance. 2
j) Support additional funding for the housing choice voucher programs or other rental 3
assistance programs and financial, tax, and/or other incentives for rental property 4
owners to participate in these programs. 5
k) Support the continuation and possible expansion of guardrails required by the current 6
4d Low-Income Rental Classification under Minn. Stat. § 273.128 that provides a class 7
rate reduction in property taxes to qualifying low-income rental properties. Extend the 8
4d transition aid to all cities on a permanent basis and Bbase any program expansion 9
proposals ofn any state mandated class-rate reduction on the a full analysis regarding 10
of the impacts to local property tax bases. contained in the January 2022 Minnesota 11
Department of Revenue 4d Affordable Housing Report and ensureEnsure that any 12
modifications to the program class-rate reductions or market value exclusions are 13
balanced between the tax benefit to existing and future 4d units that benefit from the 14
property tax reduction and the increased tax burden on the existing property tax base 15
due to any expansion. Oppose any changes to the 4d Low-Income Rental Classification 16
program that substantially increases the tax responsibility for residents and businesses 17
or increases the tax benefit for landlords without including increased benefits for 18
renters of 4d units including but not limited to deeper affordability or property 19
reinvestment. Support the implementation of a reporting process for landlords and 20
consider a sunset period for any changes made to the program to evaluate the range of 21
impacts that expanding the program may have. 22
l) Support sustainable funding for infrastructure grants currently available to cities to 23
assist with the cost of providing critical infrastructure and ensure that residential sites 24
are shovel ready for development. 25
l)m) Authorize resources by way of a tax credit, policy tools or general fund 26
appropriations to support the conversion of existing commercial property into multi-27
family housing or new types of uses that support economic growth of cities. 28
120
LE-11. Greater Minnesota Housing* 1
Issue: Cities in greater Minnesota share many of the same housing needs as metro communities. 2
However, not unlike differing real estate markets within a city, greater Minnesota communities 3
often have vastly different market conditions for housing that can necessitate priorities that vary 4
from metropolitan areas. Greater Minnesota cities face unique challenges that affect the 5
affordability, quality, and availability of housing. While local communities in greater Minnesota 6
are focusing on local efforts to attract development and encourage growth, assistance is often 7
needed from state and federal resources to construct and rehabilitate greater Minnesota housing 8
stock and that assistance should better accommodate the varying realities of a diverse state and 9
housing markets. 10
Like many metropolitan cities, greater Minnesota city housing studies often cite challenges at 11
many levels of the economic spectrum that impact local economies and population growth. 12
However, incomes within exclusively rural and rural/town mix counties are well below average 13
incomes in exclusively urban counties. The US Bureau of Economic Analysis demonstrates over 14
a 62% earnings gap between entirely rural and entirely urban counties. Greater Minnesota 15
communities in many cases do not have a significant percentage of high-earner workers that earn 16
a high enough salary to afford today’s newly constructed housing units. This factor along with 17
the rising costs of construction materials and labor are outside of the control of local 18
communities but lead to an overall lack of housing stock in many greater Minnesota cities. 19
However, one of the most vexing difference in the housing continuum is the lack of production 20
of market rate housing in rural communities. The lack of market rate production has led to aging 21
housing stock in greater Minnesota cities that hinders economic growth. At least 25% of the 22
housing stock in 34 of greater Minnesota’s 80 counties was built before 1940 and only four 23
counties in greater Minnesota have 5% or more of their housing stock constructed in 2010 or 24
later. The aging owner-occupied and rental housing stock have low assessed values far below 25
any reasonable cost of new construction and thereby translates to an environment where lenders 26
and developers often shy away from new market rate developments because of these valuations 27
or low prevailing rents. 28
121
The circumstances also mean that the few affordable housing projects that do make their way to 1
greater Minnesota are often notably of higher quality than the average market rate housing stock 2
if they were lucky enough to produce any. Many of these affordable units rent for 20-37% higher 3
than what individuals would otherwise be able to afford in many greater Minnesota cities if they 4
were buying a median valued home of significant age. Though numbers certainly differ, modest 5
market rate units that have been attempted or in some instances advanced in our communities 6
have a per unit cost of $140-$150,000 while a tax credit project with their added soft cost can 7
often reach costs of $225,000 per unit or more. Project costs for workforce housing can also 8
become prohibitive for many developers in greater Minnesota due to prevailing wage 9
requirements. While greater Minnesota cities are looking to gain every advantage and stretch 10
limited local resources for housing, more state assistance should be focused to allow rural 11
communities to minimize the financial gap of market rate production. 12
Response: The Legislature should: 13
a) Appropriate funding to state assistance programs serving greater Minnesota including 14
increasing appropriations for the Statewide Affordable Housing Aid program and 15
increasing other program appropriations to account for the state imposed prevailing 16
wage requirements. 17
b) Require a comprehensive analysis of the state’s housing assistance programs to better 18
determine the specific needs of greater Minnesota communities and adjust programs 19
accordingly. 20
c) Change Tax Increment Financing rules to address specific housing challenges in greater 21
Minnesota, including but not limited to, permanently extending the timeframe for 22
pooling redevelopment TIF projects from 5 to 10 years to allow more flexibility for 23
rural communities to amass properties and finance projects while removing blight and 24
allowing amending the affordability restrictions for housing TIF to be used for 25
workforce or market rate housing production in areas of low market rate production to 26
provide parity at a 25-year duration. 27
122
d) Appropriate more state resources and establish grant and forgivable loan programs 1
that support market rate and senior housing development proposals in greater 2
Minnesota communities where production is extremely low and modify the Statewide 3
Affordable Housing Aid program income restrictions to allow for market rate housing 4
development. 5
e) Work to address the disconnect between communities that follow the Statewide 6
Building Code and those areas that do not to ensure a level playing field while 7
encouraging prudent health and safety measures. Furthermore, the building code 8
should not be used to further disadvantage cities for the investments they have made in 9
infrastructure to comply with regulatory and smart growth principles. 10
LE-12. Energy Efficiency Improvement Requirements for Housing 11
Issue: Rising energy costs have brought attention to the poor energy efficiency of many private 12
residences and multi-family properties, especially in older housing stock. The affordability of 13
housing could be severely impacted by continued increases in home energy costs. Improvements 14
in the energy efficiency of housing would improve the affordability of local housing options and 15
would help achieve state energy demand and greenhouse gas emission reduction goals. The 16
challenge is how best to achieve that result. 17
Legislative discussions have suggested that minimum energy efficiency improvements could be 18
added as point-of-sale requirements, including energy use disclosure and basic renovations such 19
as improved attic insulation levels, window caulking and other air sealing, or improved light 20
fixtures. 21
While the goals of such a program are laudable, there are a number of concerns for how this 22
would actually be accomplished in individual cities. Most cities do not, for example, have point 23
of sale inspections. There will also be cases where the building could be structurally unable to 24
meet high attic insulation requirements, such as with manufactured housing or with older houses 25
with very little attic space. There are also concerns that the cost of meeting these energy 26
requirements could result in homeowners being reluctant to sell their houses because of the 27
123
expense of the improvements that would be required to meet new standards or property owners 1
passing on the cost of upgrades to tenants. 2
Increased exposure to educational information, such as increased access to energy audits and 3
more familiarity with and access to programs that finance energy efficiency projects could 4
increase adoption of energy efficiency improvements. Electric utilities provide successful, cost-5
effective energy efficiency programs, have a customer relationship with homeowners, a 6
regulatory requirement to meet energy demand reduction goals through conservation spending, 7
and access to technical expertise that can take into account variations in building age and 8
construction. Cities could, however, play a strong role in increasing public exposure to approved 9
educational materials and providing incentives through the use of other local financing support 10
options for property owners, such as grants, loans, and a Property Assessed Clean Energy 11
(P.A.C.E.) program. Cities could also take advantage of the recently added assessment authority 12
in Minn. Stat. § 429.021 to provide financing for energy improvement projects in residential 13
properties of five or more units if a property owner petitions for an energy improvement project 14
in an existing building. 15
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities agrees that there is a need to improve the energy 16
efficiency of residential building stock to reduce energy consumption and improve the 17
affordability and livability of housing. The state should focus its efforts on improving 18
educational programs and on improving the use of the existing statewide Conservation 19
Improvement Program (CIP) and similar programs and provide property owners with 20
technical and financial support for weatherization and energy efficiency improvements. 21
Further, the state should work to make residential Property Assessed Clean Energy 22
(P.A.C.E.) programs viable for local governments. 23
Cities should use their communication tools, such as newsletters, web sites, and staff 24
communications to promote these efforts and to help link property owners to educational 25
materials and program resources. Additionally, cities could be incentivized to adopt 26
strategies to disclose energy usage data for building owners to identify options for cost-27
efficient energy improvements. 28
124
LE-13. In-Home Day Care Facilities 1
Issue: There are restrictions on the ability of a city to regulate licensed day care facilities. Minn. 2
Stat. § 462.357, subd. 7, states that certain licensed residential facilities and day care facilities 3
must be considered a permitted single-family use for zoning purposes. The restriction is designed 4
to protect “in-home” daycare facilities, but the law applies even if the facility is not the primary 5
residence of the day care provider. This creates a loophole for providers to use a single-family 6
home as a commercial daycare facility, which might not otherwise be allowable under a city 7
zoning ordinance. 8
Response: The Legislature should amend Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 7, to clarify that a 9
licensed day care facility serving 12 or fewer persons is considered a permitted single-10
family use only if the license holder owns or rents and resides in the home. 11
LE-14. Residential Programs 12
Issue: Minnesota’s deinstitutionalization policy seeks to ensure that all people can live in 13
housing that maximizes community integration. Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 6a. states that 14
“persons with disabilities should not be excluded by municipal zoning ordinance or other land 15
use regulations from the benefits of normal residential surroundings.” Minnesota cities support 16
inclusion of people with and without disabilities in their communities, but these policies are best 17
implemented with minimal encroachments on municipal zoning authority and positive working 18
relationships between cities, care providers, and the state. 19
On one hand, treating persons with disabilities differently generally raises questionable issues of 20
disparate treatment with the Federal Fair Housing Act. On the other hand, without some 21
regulation, cities are powerless to protect individuals with disabilities from a clustering of 22
residential programs within one neighborhood. As the Department of Justice has stated, while 23
density regulations are generally suspect, “if a neighborhood came to be composed largely of 24
group homes, that could adversely affect individuals with disabilities and would be inconsistent 25
with the objective of integrating persons with disabilities into the community.” (Joint Statement 26
of the Department of Justice and the Department of Housing and Urban Development.) 27
125
To this end, and in upholding a state and local dispersal requirement, the Eighth Circuit Court of 1
Appeals stated that the requirement was designed to ensure that people with disabilities “needing 2
residential treatment will not be forced into enclaves of treatment facilities that would replicate 3
and thus perpetuate the isolation resulting from institutionalization.” Familystyle of St. Paul, Inc. 4
v. St. Paul, 923 F.2d 91, 95 (8th Cir. 1991). 5
City authority to regulate the locations of residential programs is limited by state statute and the 6
federal Fair Housing Act (FHA), although Minn. Stat. § 245A.11, subd. 4, prohibits the 7
Commissioner of Human Services from granting an initial license to a residential program of six 8
or fewer people within 1,320 feet of an existing residential program in cities of the first class. 9
In 2015, Minn. Stat. § 245A.11, subd. 4, was amended to clarify that the Commissioner of 10
Human Services is required to approve licenses for “community residential settings” within 11
1,320 feet of existing residential programs. A “community residential setting” is commonly 12
known as adult foster care. While this was the original intent of the legislature, statutory terms 13
changed over the years; this amendment was to make various statutory references consistent. 14
In 2022, Minn. Stat. § 245A.11, subd. 2, was amended to temporarily allow licensed residential 15
care services provided to more than four people with developmental disabilities in a supervised 16
living facility, including intermediate care facilities for people with developmental disabilities as 17
a permitted single-family residential use at an increased capacity of seven to eight people until 18
July 2023. Cities that have zoning regulation already in place prohibiting this type of facility as a 19
single-family residential use do not have to permit the use. 20
Sufficient funding and oversight are needed to ensure that residents living in residential 21
programs have appropriate care and supervision, and that neighborhoods and residents of 22
residential programs are not negatively impacted by high concentrations of these types of 23
programs. As it stands now, there is nothing preventing clustering of residential programs in 24
most cities in the state. Cities want to be part of the solution, and more than anything cities desire 25
to be, and should be, partners in serving the policies of deinstitutionalization. Cities have an 26
interest in, and are in the best position, to preserve a balance in residential neighborhoods 27
between residential programs and all other uses. Because Minnesota cities are committed to 28
inclusion of all individuals, it is in the best interest of the state, care providers, and those 29
126
individuals served, that all parties include cities as partners before opening a residential program 1
to best plan for community integration. 2
Response: Cities should maintain the statutory authority to require agencies, as well as 3
licensed and registered providers that operate residential programs, to notify the city 4
before properties are operated. Cities should be provided with the necessary contact 5
information after a residential program is licensed or registered. Providers applying to 6
operate residential programs should be required to contact the city to be informed of 7
applicable local regulations. Finally, licensing or registering authorities must be responsible 8
for removing any residents incapable of living in such an environment, particularly if they 9
become a danger to themselves or others. 10
LE-15. Inclusionary Housing 11
Issue: Provisions in current state statute (Minn. Stat. § 462.358, subd. 11) allowing cities to enter 12
into development agreements for the inclusion of a portion of the units in the development to be 13
affordable for low- or moderate-income families have been a source of conflict between cities 14
and housing developers. 15
Cities are concerned builders that view this statute as a restriction on local authority to adopt 16
policies that promote availability of housing affordable to those who are unable to purchase or 17
rent housing at price points that the market alone provides. 18
Response: The Legislature should: 19
a) Strengthen and clarify cities’ authority to carry out policies that offer developers a 20
range of incentives in return for including a designated number of affordable units in 21
their projects. 22
b) Identify strategies to ensure long-term affordability of rental and owner-occupied 23
housing produced as a result of such policies and practices including expanding the 24
parameters of affordable housing restrictive covenants to extend beyond 30 years to 25
ensure long-term affordability. 26
127
c) Focus state housing policy to support for local assessment of housing needs and direct 1
additional state resources and the full exercise of local authority to increase 2
development of affordable rental units and access to entry-level, owner-occupied 3
housing. 4
d) Support voluntary measures to encourage cities to adopt and carry out land-use plans, 5
activities, and subdivision regulations aimed at providing for construction and 6
marketing of housing where a portion of all new units are affordable to lower-income 7
households. 8
LE-16. Community Land Trusts* 9
Issue: The increasing price of land available for housing development, particularly for retaining 10
affordability of housing for lower-income households, is a concern throughout the state. Creating 11
more permanently affordable, owner-occupied housing depends heavily on maximizing the cost-12
effectiveness of taxpayer investments. The Legislature has previously appropriated funding and 13
granted the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency authority to assist cities with funding 14
community land trusts (CLTs) for affordable housing. 15
Currently, Land Trust properties have a tax classification of 1.0% and property owners must pay 16
property taxes based on the market value of the property, which is assessed relative to 17
neighboring properties. However, because land trust properties are to remain permanently 18
affordable, land trust owners can only receive a portion of the appreciation of the value of the 19
home when a sale is made. 20
Response: The Legislature should: 21
a) Support continuation of the land trust capacity-building program and provide capital 22
start-up funds so community land trusts can continue to offer gap financing, interest 23
rate write-downs, predevelopment financing, and financial underwriting and explore 24
other incentives for homeowners to sell their properties to land trusts to build capacity. 25
b) Support the current .75 class-rate reduction for community land trust properties and 26
support efforts by the Minnesota Community Land Trust Coalition and other housing 27
128
preservation stakeholders to develop property tax valuation modifications to lower 1
property taxes for qualifying low-income sales-price-restricted properties enrolled in 2
CLT. programs including expanding 4d Low-Income Rental Classification eligibility to 3
include CLT properties and providing additional tax relief for qualified low-income 4
CLT property owners by way of market value exclusion or other general property tax 5
assistance. 6
LE-17. Telecommunications and Information Technology 7
Issue: Telecommunications and information technology is essential public infrastructure for the 8
efficient, equitable, and affordable delivery of local government services to residents and 9
businesses. Telecommunications includes voice, video, data, and services delivered over cable, 10
telephone, fiber-optic, wireless, and all other platforms. 11
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports a balanced approach to 12
telecommunications policy that allows new technologies to flourish while preserving local 13
regulatory authority. Regulations and oversight of telecommunications services are 14
important prerogatives for local government to advance and balance community interests, 15
including ensuring public safety, ensuring equitable access, maintaining high quality basic 16
services that meet local needs, spurring economic development, and providing affordable 17
rates to all consumers. Policies should strengthen and not diminish local authority to 18
manage public rights-of-way including public and private infrastructure, to zone, to collect 19
reimbursement of costs and reasonable compensation for the use of public assets, or to 20
work cooperatively with the private sector. The League opposes the adoption of state and 21
federal policies that restrict cities’ ability to finance, construct, and operate 22
telecommunications networks. 23
LE-18. Broadband* 24
Issue: High-speed Internet is essential infrastructure needed by cities to compete in a global 25
economy. Yet many communities do not have access to broadband at affordable prices. High 26
fixed costs, low density, and short-term return-on-investment thresholds for private sector 27
providers contribute to the lack of broadband across the state. Investing in universal broadband 28
129
access has substantial local and regional economic benefits for communities of all sizes. Cities 1
and other local units of government are facilitating the deployment of broadband services to 2
increase connectivity, reliability, availability, and affordability for residents, schools and 3
businesses through a variety of models, including municipal broadband and public-private 4
partnerships. However, attempts have been made to restrict cities from providing 5
telecommunications services, particularly in unserved or underserved areas. Past court cases 6
have overturned interpretation by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that states 7
may not limit the extension of municipal broadband services from one city to another. 8
Due to the high costs of broadband infrastructure, the state continues to expand its role to 9
identify and formulate tools and provide resources to expand broadband access. The Office of 10
Broadband Development within the Department of Employment and Economic Development 11
(DEED) has developed a strong partnership through its efforts on broadband infrastructure 12
deployment and digital inclusion between the state, local communities, and broadband providers 13
to deploy high-speed Internet in unserved and underserved areas. The Office supports broadband 14
expansion through broadband mapping and managing the state’s Border-to-Border Broadband 15
grant program, which is funded by state general fund appropriations and more recently funds 16
authorized by the federal government for broadband deployment. In addition to the state’s focus 17
on extending broadband to unserved areas, Minnesota must also be on the cutting edge for next-18
generation broadband investments and ensuring that Minnesota’s statutory speed goals in Minn. 19
Stat. § 237.012 are updated to reflect emerging technologies and broadband use trends. It is also 20
critical that the state maintain authorization of stable general fund spending funding for 21
broadband infrastructure deployment as a priority to address the state’s statutory speed goals and 22
not become dependent outilize state resources to bolster n federal broadband funding including 23
the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) Program authorized by the fedral 24
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021. 25
The COVID-19 pandemic laid bare the critical importance of reliable access to broadband 26
internet both for governments that had to quickly adjust to provide services online while 27
Minnesotans were forced to learn, work, and receive healthcare online. While certain populations 28
in Minnesota were well prepared to make the adjustment to receive services, work, and learn 29
online, many were not due to the digital divide that remains. 30
130
Response: To promote economic development, education and achieve state broadband 1
goals, the Legislature, Governor’s office, and state agencies should: 2
a) Identify and implement actions for the state to reach and maintain a position in the top 3
five states for broadband speed that is universally accessible to residents and 4
businesses; 5
b) Make significant investments to the Border-to-Border Broadband Grant Program and 6
continue to encourage public/private sector collaboration including options that use 7
technologies such as wireless while remaining consistent with the League’s Right-of-8
Way Management policy to cost-effectively expand broadband service access; 9
c) Support measures to authorize and encourage cities and other local units of government 10
to play a direct role in providing broadband infrastructure and/or services; 11
d) Support legislation to remove existing barriers in statute that hinder the ability for 12
Minnesota cities to own and operate broadband systems including the elimination of 13
Minn. Stat. § 237.19, which requires a supermajority voter approval for the provision 14
of municipal broadband; 15
d)e) Remove barriers to the exercise of local authority to provide such services, including 16
repeal of Minn. Stat. § 237.19, that requires a supermajority voter approval for the 17
provision of local phone service by a local unit of government; 18
e)f) Offer incentives to private sector service providers to respond to local or regional needs 19
and to collaborate with cities and other public entities to deploy broadband 20
infrastructure capable of delivering sufficient bandwidth and capacity to meet 21
immediate and future local needs; 22
f)g)Adopt policies which seek to position Minnesota as a state of choice for testing next-23
generation broadband technologies; 24
g)h) Affirm that cities have the authority to partner with private entities to finance 25
broadband infrastructure using city bonding authority; 26
131
h)i)Remove barriers that limit the ability for the state to deploy Border-to-Border 1
Broadband grant funds in areas that may be served by existing or future federal 2
broadband programs and those that restrict anti-competitive practices, and prevent 3
predatory action that prevent or impede cities, municipal utilities, schools, libraries, 4
and other public sector entities from collaborating and deploying broadband 5
infrastructure and services at the local and regional level; 6
i)j) Supporting funding and efforts to continuously update and verify comprehensive 7
statewide street-level mapping of broadband services to identify underserved areas and 8
connectivity issues; 9
j)k) Discuss how well the FCC and state broadband maps document actual broadband 10
coverage across Minnesota including wireless options. These maps are used by funders 11
to determine grant program eligibility making overstatement of available services 12
highly consequential with negative impacts for rural places; 13
k)l)Recognize the crucial role of local government in the work of the Governor’s 14
Broadband Task Force and fund the Office of Broadband Development (OBD) and 15
ensure base budgets supporting OBD remain at levels sufficient for it to meet its 16
statutory mandates; 17
l)m) Support the creation of an OBD operating fund to advance and promote programs 18
and projectsnew policies and resources that improve broadband adoption, hold internet 19
service providers receiving funding accountable, achieve significantly higher 20
broadband speeds, and support efforts to improve digital inclusion by ensuring that 21
robust, sustainable, and affordable internet connectivity is widely available and 22
affordable to all Minnesotans including the ability for cities to franchise broadband 23
providers; 24
On the federal level, the League urges Congress to adopt laws restoring the ability of 25
municipalities to extend beyond their borders to serve unserved and underserved areas. 26
The League also urges Congress and the Federal Communications Commission to 27
structure federal broadband grant programs to work in conjunction with the state’s 28
132
Border-to-Border Broadband grant program and not prohibit state funding in areas that 1
receive federal broadband assistance if those areas could also benefit from state funding. 2
LE-19. Competitive Cable Franchising Authority* 3
Issue: Despite claims made by some in the cable industry, studies and evidence to date do not 4
support that state franchising is the solution for competition, lower consumer rates, and improved 5
customer service. Unlike the exercise of local franchising authority, state franchising models 6
frequently make no provision for staffing at the state level or for effective resolution of consumer 7
complaints. 8
Municipal cable franchising has resulted in equitable construction with cable operators providing 9
uniform quality of cable service and uniform cable pricing to city residents. Municipal 10
franchising authorities have acted to protect cable subscribers and have required cable operators 11
to provide public benefits, such as the construction of municipal networks and access channels. 12
Communications systems not subject to franchising in many areas have systems incapable of 13
serving municipal residents uniformly. Municipal cable franchising has been the most successful 14
authorization of communications service providers with access to the public rights-of-way 15
including equitable deployments resulting in uniform quality of service, pricing and public 16
benefits. 17
Cable service provided by a cable communications system that uses infrastructure located in the 18
public right-of-way to transmit video signals remains subject to local franchising authority. 19
Maintaining local franchising most effectively creates and preserves agreements that guarantee 20
broad access to services throughout the community, ensuring there is no digital divide for access 21
to available additional services such as access to IP voice and high-speed Internet via 22
infrastructure that also delivers video programming services. 23
Response: State and federal policy should maintain local cable franchisinge authority and 24
local oversight of the public rights-of-way and the legislature and federal government 25
should take all efforts necessary to update and improve municipal cable franchising 26
authority in all state and federal legislative and regulatory proceedings to reflect market 27
trends and emerging technology. , as well as ensure franchise agreements reflect new 28
133
technology, and are reasonably tailored to the technical and operational differences among 1
providers and communities. Independent studies clearly demonstrate that statewide 2
franchising does not increase direct competition to incumbent cable franchisees. And it 3
subsequently has not lowered rates and does not improve customer service. 4
The Legislature, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and Congress should also 5
continue to recognize, support and maintain the exercise of local franchising authority to 6
encourage increased competition between incumbent cable system operators and new 7
wireline competitive video service providers including: 8
a) Maintaining provisions in Minn. Stat. Ch. 238 that establish and uphold local 9
franchising authority, including the authority to receive a franchise fee based on gross 10
revenues irrespective of any in-kind contributions; 11
b) Refraining from adopting any FCC rule changes that would further restrict existing 12
local authority to charge for and control access to public rights-of-way by all video and 13
cable service providers; 14
c) Maintaining local authority to charge fees on providers to ensure the provision of 15
public, educational, governmental (PEG) programming, and interactive technologies to 16
require the provision of video channels and video streaming for PEG programming 17
with video and audio quality/channel location equivalent to that of the local broadcast 18
stations, and ensuring programming is accessible and searchable by all residents of the 19
local authority through detailed Electronic Programming Guide listings and other 20
navigation and distribution technologies that are equivalent to that of local broadcast 21
stations; 22
c)d) Advancing legislation that dedicates funding for municipal digital media, such as a 23
dedicated tax or fee on digital products 24
d)e) Ensuring continued cost-effective local government access to capacity on 25
institutional networks (I-Nets) provided by local cable system operators for public 26
safety communications, libraries, schools, and other public institutions to use state-of-27
the-art network applications; and 28
134
e)f) Strengthening local authority to enforce customer service standards and transparency 1
in pricing. 2
LE-20. Public Right-of-Way Management* 3
Issue: Cities hold local rights-of-way in trust for the public as an increasingly scarce and 4
valuable asset. As demand increases for use of public rights-of-way (PROW), cities must 5
coordinate the use of this resource among competing uses and to manage the use of the PROW 6
for delivery of essential municipal utility services. Cities continue to experience increased 7
demand for space in the PROW including the siting of underground wired and overhead wireless 8
facilities and sites for wireless communications. Additionally, technology located in the public 9
right-of-way will continue to support the increase of new modes of mobility and delivery 10
methods including Connected Autonomous Vehicles (CAV) that may also operate in the public 11
right-of-way. While local management responsibilities vary and are site specific, the increased 12
demand for utilizing space in the public right-of way underscores the necessity for maintaining 13
local authority. 14
Minnesota’s Telecommunications Right-of-Way User Law was amended during the 2017 15
Session with legislation creating a separate permitting system for placement of small wireless 16
facilities on city-owned structures in the public right-of-way. The change in law clarified that 17
wireless providers are telecommunications right-of-way users and maintained cities' right-of-way 18
management authority, but limitations were imposed on cities' compensation through rent and 19
timelines for processing small wireless facilities permits. 20
Response: Minn. Stat. §§ 237.162-.163 worked well for many years, but Minnesota was a 21
part of a nationwide effort by wireless providers to pass laws providing them with easier 22
access to public rights-of-way and city-owned infrastructure. While Minnesota's law 23
maintains more local control than those passed in many other states, the League of 24
Minnesota Cities opposes efforts to further restrict local government authority over the 25
public right-of-way. Furthermore, the Federal Communications Commission is undergoing 26
review of Telecommunications Act rules and policies related to local government 27
regulatory authority. State and federal policymakers and regulators should: 28
135
a) Support Uphold localmunicipal authority to manage and protect public rights-of-way, 1
including franchising, reasonable zoning and subdivision regulation, reasonable 2
regulations of structures in the public right-of-way, and the exercise of local police 3
powers; 4
b) Recognize that cities have a paramount role in developing, locating, siting, and 5
enforcing utility construction and safety standards; 6
c) Support localmunicipal authority to require reimbursement and 7
compensationfranchise all service providers from service providers for managing 8
usethat site infrastructure in the of public rights-of-way and ensure that local authority 9
to controlreceive compensation for use of public rights-of-way. is expanded to account 10
for new products and emerging technologies; 11
d) Maintain city authority to franchise gas, electric, open video systems and cable services, 12
and expand city ability to collect compensation for other services utilizing the PROW 13
including but not limited to telecommunications and broadband services, and all other 14
wireline programming platforms and services to support maintenance and management 15
of the traveled portion of the PROW and other public services of importance to 16
communities; 17
d)e) Support legislation to authorize Minnesota cities to franchise broadband providers 18
and to receive franchise fees under Minn. Stat. Sec. 222.37 and 116J.399, Subd. 8 and 19
such other statutes as necessary. 20
e)f) Encourage a collaborative process with stakeholders, including cities, to determine any 21
revised standards if needed; 22
f)g)Recognize that as rights-of-way become more crowded, the costs of disrupting critical 23
infrastructure become evident and the exercise of local authority to manage competing 24
demands and ensure public safety in the PROWs becomes increasingly important; 25
g)h) Ensure the removal of abandoned equipment and accompanying support structures 26
by the service providers from the public right-of-way; 27
136
h)i)Maintain the courts as the primary forum for resolving disputes over the exercise of 1
such authority; 2
i)j) Maintain existing local authority to review and approve or deny plans for installation 3
or relocation of additional wires or cables on in-place utility poles. In the alternative, 4
cities should have broader authority to require the underground placement of new 5
and/or existing services at the cost of the utility or telecommunications provider; 6
j)k) Support the collaboration with local units of government as the state explores efforts 7
to expand infrastructure in the public right-of-way to provide for increased 8
connectivity for Connected Autonomous Vehicles (CAV). 9
LE-21. Wireless Infrastructure and Equipment Siting 10
Issue: Demand for wireless communication service has increased requests by private and public 11
sector providers to site additional towers, antennas, small cells and other facilities in cities. It is 12
anticipated that applications to install small cell wireless facilities and distributed antenna 13
systems (DAS) will continue to grow as technology evolves over time. Despite changes made to 14
Minn. Stat. § 237.163 that created a special process for the siting of small wireless facilities, 15
maintaining cities’ local zoning authority and police power to manage and coordinate the siting 16
of these facilities continue is necessary and appropriate. 17
Response: Cities must continue to exercise full authority to consider public health, safety, 18
and welfare concerns in responding to requests to site, upgrade or alter wireless facilities. 19
The Legislature, Federal Communications Commission (FCC), and Congress should not 20
place further restrictions on city authority to manage the siting of wireless facilities in the 21
public right-of-way nor enact compensation restrictions that would result in local 22
government subsidization of wireless providers. Furthermore, cities must have recourse to 23
require removal by the provider of equipment deemed abandoned. 24
LE-22. County Economic Development Authorities 25
Issue: The 2005 Legislature authorized all counties outside the metropolitan area to establish 26
county economic development authorities (EDAs). Minn. Stat. § 469.1082 provides specificity 27
137
on certain process and limitations issues, including the ability of cities to prohibit the county 1
EDA from operating within the city as well as within an agreed-upon urban service area or 2
within a distance approved during the formation of the county EDA. County EDA activity in 3
areas surrounding cities will directly impact the adjacent city in terms of service provision and 4
taxes. 5
Response: The Legislature should require city approval for proposed county EDA activities 6
within two miles of a city. 7
LE-23. Local Appropriations to Economic Development Organizations 8
Issue: Cities and towns are allowed to appropriate up to $50,000 per year from general fund 9
revenue to an incorporated development society or organization for “promoting, advertising, 10
improving, or developing the economic and agricultural resources” of the city or town. The 11
$50,000 cap has been in place since 1989 and places unnecessary restrictions on a city’s ability 12
to work with non-profit development corporations. Local governments should have the flexibility 13
to work with outside organizations if local elected officials believe it is in the best interest of 14
their communities to do so. Such appropriations are subject to the same budgetary oversight as 15
other government expenditures, and local elected officials are ultimately responsible to the voters 16
for how local tax dollars are spent. 17
Response: The Legislature should amend Minn. Stat. § 469.191 to eliminate or increase the 18
cap on appropriations to incorporated development societies or organizations. 19
LE-24. Workforce Readiness 20
Issue: Incumbent worker training and education must be an important component of Minnesota’s 21
efforts to improve workforce readiness. By making firms and employees more competitive, 22
incumbent worker training can increase wages, increase employment opportunities, fill skilled 23
worker gaps, and keep jobs and employers in their communities. The Minnesota Job Skills 24
Partnership is one proven tool that provides training to thousands of incumbent workers each 25
year. 26
Response: The Legislature should: 27
138
a) Fully fund the Minnesota Job Skills Partnership and other workforce training 1
programs administered by the Department of Employment and Economic 2
Development, the Department of Human Services, and the various education agencies; 3
b) Provide additional flexible funding to local workforce councils, including governments 4
and educational facilities, for the purpose of upgrading the skills and productivity of 5
the workforce, and pursue additional creative programming and funding to prepare 6
and place underemployed and unemployed Minnesotans, as well as address the issue of 7
those phasing out of the workplace and retiring; 8
c) Provide additional funding for programs specifically designed to address youth 9
employment such as career and workforce readiness programs, and employment 10
disparities; and 11
d) Continue to support cities that provide workforce programs that are coordinated with 12
and complement state and regional efforts by seeking municipal approval before 13
making any changes to those service areas. 14
LE-25. Business Development Programs 15
Issue: Programs such as the Minnesota Investment Fund (MIF), the Job Creation Fund (JCF), the 16
Redevelopment Program, and contaminated site clean-up grants provide funding opportunities 17
for communities and businesses to develop their local and regional economies. These well-18
utilized programs create infrastructure, revitalize property, and help businesses generate and 19
expand jobs. Cities are key facilitators in the implementation of economic development 20
strategies through land use and other policies. 21
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports continued and sustainable funding for 22
the Minnesota Investment Fund and the Job Creation Fund to assist local communities and 23
businesses in creating, growing, and retaining jobs. The Legislature should also provide 24
dedicated and sustainable funding for the Redevelopment Grant and Demolition Loan 25
Program. 26
139
DEED should solicit input from cities about how best to implement the Fund, and make 1
adjustments to the administration of the program as necessary. The League supports 2
Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) studying and making 3
recommendations on methods to improve the geographic balance of recipients, by allowing 4
the use of additional evaluation criteria beyond the current job creation goal such as 5
providing higher-wage jobs or achieving racial equity policy goals. that would allow all 6
regions of the state to better prosper. 7
LE-26. Remediation and Redevelopment 8
Issue: Communities across Minnesota are faced with expensive barriers to re-using property. 9
These roadblocks include deteriorating, obsolete, and vacant structures, and contaminated land. 10
Larger scale redevelopment projects often require the purchase and assembly of multiple, smaller 11
parcels of land that are not suitable for development on their own. Cities and development 12
authorities may need to purchase land over a period of years and hold them for later 13
development, reducing the effectiveness of traditional financing tools that require immediate 14
development. 15
Such barriers pose significant problems for cities seeking to re-use existing infrastructure, 16
maintain and improve property tax base, provide jobs and housing opportunities, and preserve 17
historic structures. Land remediation activities are particularly costly because significant 18
remediation must occur before private-sector interest can be generated. Exacerbating this 19
situation, the land remediation programs administered by the Department of Employment and 20
Economic Development (DEED) and the Metropolitan Council programs continue to be 21
underfunded. 22
Response: In recognition of the unique needs of land remediation projects statewide, the 23
Legislature should increase funding for the statewide redevelopment account. The League 24
of Minnesota Cities also supports the creation of a land assembly grant or loan program to 25
assist cities and economic development authorities with the challenge of assembling small 26
parcels for redevelopment. The League supports competitive programs administered by 27
DEED that distribute the funds equitably between greater Minnesota and the metro area. 28
140
The Legislature should continue its support and increase funding levels for state and 1
regional programs to assist in contamination cleanup and brownfields remediation efforts. 2
The State should recognize that the rehabilitation of land due to obsolescence or 3
incompatible land uses is a component of redevelopment. The Legislature should amend 4
the definition of redevelopment district in Minn. Stat. § 469.174, subd. 10, to include the 5
obsolescence and incompatible land uses included in a renewal and renovation district 6
(Minn. Stat. § 469.174, subd. 10a), thereby providing cities with more flexible tools to 7
address land remediation and redevelopment. 8
The Legislature should also revive a program similar to “This Old Shop” (Minn. Stat. § 9
273.11, subd. 19), which would allow cities greater flexibility in targeting commercial 10
development and redevelopment. The Legislature should consider enacting authority that 11
would provide a tax deferral on improvements to commercial buildings, including those 12
located in designated rehabilitation or historic preservation districts. The program’s age 13
limit qualifications under Minn. Stat § 273.11, subd. 19, should be modified to include 14
properties that are at least 30 years old. 15
The League is supportive of recent extensions to the Minnesota Historic Structure Tax 16
Credit in Minn. Stat. § 116J.8737, which provides a 20 percent tax rebate for rehabilitation 17
of qualified historic buildings. However, the Legislature should eliminate the sunset 18
provision of the tax credit to provide certainty to cities and their project developer partners 19
to proceed with historic redevelopment projects that are complex and time consuming. 20
LE-27. Development Authority Levy Limits 21
Issue: Under Minn. Stat. § 469.107, § 469.033, and § 469.053, Economic Development 22
Authorities (EDAs), Housing and Redevelopment Authorities (HRAs) and port authority levies 23
for economic development activities are capped. These limits can hinder the planning of future 24
development. 25
Response: The Legislature should increase or repeal levy limits or increase the levying 26
authority for EDA, HRA, and port authority activities in Minn. Stat. ch. 469. 27
141
LE-28. Tax Increment Financing (TIF)* 1
Issue: TIF is the most important tool available to fund community development and 2
redevelopment efforts. Over time, the TIF law has become increasingly complex as the 3
Legislature seeks to provide cities with the resources to grow the state’s economy while 4
maintaining limits on the use of property taxes. Cities need greater flexibility to use TIF for 5
community and economic development that support a city’s residents and businesses. Further 6
restrictions of TIF would render the tool less effective and will hinder local efforts to support job 7
creation, housing, redevelopment and remediation. 8
The need for flexibility has been accentuated due to the pandemic economic downturn which has 9
dramatically slowed existing projects that must continue to comply with statutory timelines. 10
Many projects will have difficulty meeting time-line requirements such as the five-year rule 11
without special legislation authorization. 12
Further restrictions of TIF would render the tool less effective and will hinder local efforts to 13
support job creation, housing, redevelopment and remediation. 14
Response: The Legislature should not enact future TIF law restrictions, rather the 15
Legislature should: 16
a) Amend Minn. Stat. § 469.1763, subd. 4, to clarify that tax increment pooling limitations 17
are calculated on a cumulative basis. 18
b)a) Modify Minn. Stat. 469.174, subd. 10, to allow a redevelopment district to be 19
established where only 50 percent of the buildings are required to be structurally 20
substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. 21
c)b) Clarify that expenditures for the necessary maintenance of properties within TIF 22
districts are an allowable use of tax increment under Minn. Stat. § 469.176, subd. 4; 23
d)c) Allow term extensions for redevelopment districts which are taking longer to 24
develop; 25
142
e)d) Amend Minn. Stat. § 469.1763, subd. 3, to eliminate the “Five-year Rule” for 1
districts that are taking longer to develop; 2
f)e) Amend Minn. Stat. § 469.174, subd. 25, to provide time limits on the "deemed 3
increment" created by land sales, leases and loans, and allow authorities greater 4
flexibility in the use of lease revenues to fund ongoing operations; 5
g)f)Expand the use of TIF to assist in the development of technological infrastructure and 6
products, biotechnology, research, multi-modal transportation and transit-oriented 7
development, restoration of designated historic structures, non-retail commercial 8
projects, and non-wetland areas where unstable/non-buildable soils exist; 9
h)g) Increase the ability of TIF to facilitate redevelopment and housing activities; 10
i)h)Modify the housing district income qualification level requirements to allow the levels 11
to vary according to individual communities; 12
j)i) Encourage compact development and consider reauthorization of compact development 13
TIF districts with modifications to increase their effectiveness; 14
k)j) Discourage any statutory mechanisms that directly or indirectly decrease the impact 15
of city redevelopment and economic development projects; 16
l)k)Simplify the substandard building test to resolve ambiguities and reduce the continued 17
threats of litigation; 18
m)l) Create an exception to the interfund loan resolution requirement in Minn. Stat. 19
469.178, subd. 7, to authorize the development authority to delegate to a staff person the 20
ability to set the terms and conditions of an interfund loan. 21
n)m) Amend the definition of redevelopment district under the TIF Act to include the 22
obsolescence and incompatible land uses included in a renewal and renovation district, 23
thereby providing cities with more flexible tools to address land remediation and 24
redevelopment. 25
143
o)n) Amend Minn. Stat. 469.1763 subd. 2 to provide development authorities greater 1
flexibility to address local housing needs by removing section 42 requirement for 2
housing projects outside the district. 3
p) Amend Minn. Stat. 469.174 subd. 27 to define “small city” to be a city that has a 4
population of 5,000 or less and is located 5 miles or more from another city with a 5
population of 10,000 which will allow qualifying cities to to utilize economic 6
development TIF districts for commercial developments. 7
LE-29. Property Tax Abatement Authority 8
Issue: Although tax increment financing (TIF) continues to be the primary financing mechanism 9
for local development projects, tax abatements provide cities with an important, additional 10
economic development tool. Recognizing the need for municipal development tools, the 2008 11
Legislature expanded the abatement authority by converting the limit on abatements from ten 12
percent of the current tax levy to ten percent of net tax capacity. 13
The tax abatement law requires that a political subdivision may only approve an abatement after 14
holding a public meeting with a minimum of 10 days published public notice. When more than 15
one political subdivision abates property taxes for a development project, there must be separate 16
notices and hearings for each subdivision. This requirement can be particularly burdensome for 17
programs designed to develop multiple properties over an extended period of time. If one 18
political subdivision could be designated as the lead entity for purposes of the notice and hearing 19
requirements, such projects could be made more efficient without sacrificing public 20
transparency. 21
Property tax abatements should not be considered a replacement for TIF. 22
Response: In light of current economic conditions existing property tax abatement 23
authority should be strengthened. The Legislature should: 24
a) Expand the abatement authority to allow abatement revenues to be used for economic 25
development activities such as workforce readiness and assistance programs, and 26
technology infrastructure improvements; 27
144
b) Develop a state fund to facilitate state participation in abatement projects by allowing 1
the state property tax to be abated; 2
c) Increase funding caps under Minn. Stat. § 469.1813, subd. 8 and duration limits under 3
Minn. Stat. § 469.1813, subd. 6; and 4
d) Amend Minn. Stat. § 469.1813, subd. 5, to create a streamlined notice and hearing 5
requirement for multi-jurisdictional tax abatement projects. 6
LE-30. Opportunity Zones* 7
Issue: The Opportunity Zones program was established by Congress in the Tax Cuts and Jobs 8
Act of 2017 to encourage long-term investments in low-income urban and rural communities 9
nationwide. The Opportunity Zones program provides a tax incentive for investors to re-invest 10
their unrealized capital gains into Opportunity Funds that are dedicated to investing into 11
Opportunity Zones as designated by the chief executives of every state and territory in the United 12
States. The tax incentive is available for up to ten years. 13
As the chief executive of the state of Minnesota, Governor Mark Dayton designated 128 census 14
tracts across the state as Opportunity Zones, but beyond the responsibility for this designation the 15
state does not have an additional role in the implementation of the Act. The United States 16
Treasury released rules on April 17, 2019 which provide guidance and clarification for investors 17
and fund managers. In some communities, the Act has served as a useful tool in spurring 18
development in low-income communities and could help with business development and jobs; 19
there are also questions about what impact the Act will have on the residents that live and 20
businesses that operate, in these communities today. For example, while development may have 21
positive impacts such as increasing tax base or job opportunities, robust development could have 22
unintended consequences such as displacement of current residents and businesses. While the 23
program provides investors with several benefits including the deferment of capital gains owed 24
until 2026, key tax incentives have begun to wane as we get closer to 2027 and investor attention 25
has shifted to focusing on executing projects that have already received investment. 26
145
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities urges the federal government to seek regular 1
input from communities that are designated as Opportunity Zones regarding how the tool 2
is being used, whether the tool is encouraging new development opportunities, and how 3
community members who live in the Zones are impacted, such as through a local advisory 4
board made up of residents, businesses, and other stakeholders located in the designated 5
census tracts. The Federal Government should seek input from local communities 6
throughout the implementation of the rules and regulations and consider necessary 7
amendments and adjustments as needed in response to potential questions or concerns 8
raised by the communities whose residents, workers, and businesses will be experiencing 9
the changes that ensue in the Zones. Additionally, limitations that may have led to lack of 10
engagement from communities and investors in the Qualified Opportunity Zones should be 11
addressed by the federal government if the program is to be reauthorized beyond 2027. 12
The State of Minnesota should continue to utilize community development resources to 13
stimulate investment in Opportunity Zones and adopt policies that ensure that local 14
residents, workers and businesses benefit from the investments. 15
LE-31. Revisions to the OSA Audit Function 16
Issue: Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 469.1771, the Office of the State Auditor (OSA) is responsible 17
for tax increment financing (TIF) oversight. As part of its review of TIF districts, the OSA 18
identifies alleged violations of the TIF laws and issues noncompliance notices to TIF authorities. 19
In recent years, a number of cities have received letters of inquiry from the OSA that raise 20
questions about practices long accepted by the OSA or limit statutory definitions that have not 21
been amended by the legislature for over a decade. The audit power in Minn. Stat. § 469.1771 is 22
necessary to ensure that individual cities comply with the TIF statutes, but is not effective in 23
clarifying the legislative intent of the TIF statutes. 24
In addition, the TIF statute requires that authorities respond to noncompliance notices within 60-25
days of receiving the notification. There is no deadline for the OSA to respond, and authorities 26
often do not receive timely responses on the matter from the OSA. Government agencies 27
typically have response-time deadlines, and it is appropriate for the OSA to respond by a time 28
146
certain to provide finality to the audit process. Any final disposition notice must be clear about 1
the final disposition of the matter. 2
Finally, the statutory audit enforcement process does not create an environment where these 3
policy questions can be fairly and sufficiently resolved. County attorneys lack the resources to 4
prioritize TIF disputes and lack the subject matter expertise needed to analyze the merits of the 5
OSA’s audit findings. This results in excessive deference granted to the OSA’s original audit 6
findings. Faced with the potential loss of increment, payment of attorney fees, and small 7
likelihood of success on the merits, cities often acquiesce to the OSA to save time and money. 8
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities believes there should be a more defined process 9
to establish rules or guidelines for TIF authorities with adequate input from local 10
government officials and public finance professionals prior to their adoption. 11
In the event that the OSA determines to issue a final noncompliance notice to a TIF 12
authority, the Legislature should require the OSA to issue the notice within 60 days of 13
receiving the authority’s response. Any final noncompliance notice should contain the 14
OSA’s final position on the matter, the date upon which it forwarded the matter to the 15
county attorney, and the next steps that are required to be taken according to state law. 16
Upon expiration of the 60-day period, the authority should be deemed to be in compliance 17
with the TIF laws if no final noncompliance notice is received. 18
In order to ensure a fair process to resolve disputes over TIF findings of the OSA, the 19
Legislature should consider whether the authority to resolve such disputes should be 20
shifted from county attorneys to the Office of Administrative Hearings. 21
LE-32. OSA Time Limitations 22
Issue: The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) has the authority to issue noncompliance notices 23
for every existing tax increment financing (TIF) district in the state for alleged violations of the 24
TIF laws. This authority extends retroactively to the inception of the district. Accordingly, TIF 25
authorities can receive noncompliance notices for alleged violations that occurred 20 or more 26
years ago. Often, staff and record-keeping procedures have changed, and TIF authorities find it 27
147
difficult to reconstruct the past in order to identify and remedy these situations. Similarly, the 1
OSA claims the authority, based on the state’s records retention schedule, to audit TIF districts 2
for up to 10 years after decertification, which requires cities to expend staff resources to maintain 3
files and a working knowledge of old districts for an unreasonable period of time. 4
Response: A reasonable timeframe within which alleged violations are identified should be 5
established. The Legislature should reasonably restrict the OSA’s ability to issue 6
noncompliance notices to the six-year period prior to the notice’s issuance date. The 7
Legislature should also require the OSA to conduct any audits on decertified districts 8
within one year of decertification. 9
LE-33. Workforce Housing 10
Issue: Job creation is one of the fundamental goals of economic development. When employers 11
create new jobs through expansion or relocation there must be sufficient housing in the host 12
community for the new workers and their families to live. In rural communities, a lack of 13
housing stock for new workers can prevent a planned expansion or relocation, hampering job 14
growth and economic development. The economics of building a housing development in greater 15
Minnesota communities makes private development difficult, and workers with higher paying 16
jobs do not qualify for traditional affordable housing. This housing gap can bring development 17
and job growth in a community to a halt. 18
In 2014, at the urging of cities through Minnesota, the Legislature created a workforce housing 19
pilot program for three cities in Roseau and Pennington Counties. In 2015 the Legislature passed 20
League-sponsored legislation that created the workforce housing development program and 21
appropriated $4 million to the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) 22
to administer the program. Once grant awards from DEED were made, prevailing wage 23
requirements, construction costs, and land prices have shown to lessen the effectiveness of 24
creating more workforce housing units. It is important to ensure the appropriate resources and 25
process exist for the Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) to determine representative and 26
accurate prevailing wage amounts in different areas across the state. 27
148
The 2017 Legislature approved funding for the Workforce Housing Grant Program at $2 million 1
each year. The program was moved from DEED to be administered by MN Housing Finance 2
Agency (MHFA) in Minn. Stat. 469A.39 with a change in qualifications that gives preference to 3
cities under 30,000 population (rather than 18,000 previously). 4
The 2017 Legislature also approved a new use of TIF authority for workforce housing (Minn. 5
Stat. § 469.174-176). In addition to requirements under Minn. State. 469.175, subd. 3, county 6
and school boards must approve the TIF plan before it is enacted and the authority sunsets in 7
2027. These additional requirements specific to workforce housing TIF districts put additional 8
barriers on workforce housing development and does not fully recognize the role of cities as the 9
typical lead government entity on housing projects. Minn. Stat. § 469.175, subd. 2, currently 10
requires cities to provide the county auditor and clerk of the school board with the proposed TIF 11
plan and an estimate of the fiscal and economic implications of the proposed TIF district at least 12
30 days before the public hearing required by Minn. Stat. § 469.175, subd. 3. The county auditor 13
and school board shall provide copies of these TIF plan materials to members of their boards. 14
These current requirements provide sufficient notice to taxpayers and other government entities 15
about proposed TIF districts. 16
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports additional tools for local communities 17
to develop workforce housing: 18
a) MHFA should solicit input from local communities to ensure that the goals of the 19
Workforce Housing Development Program are met, and MHFA should award funds to 20
eligible projects as quickly and efficiently as possible; 21
b) The Legislature should increase funding to the Economic Development and Housing 22
Challenge Program to aid housing in support of job growth, and amend Minn. Stat. § 23
462A.33 to either increase or eliminate the maximum income levels for participation in 24
the program; and 25
c) The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency should make administrative changes to the 26
Economic Development and Housing Challenge Grant program to streamline the 27
application process, reduce the per-unit cost of constructing affordable housing, and 28
149
increase the construction of affordable rental units at 80% of median income and 1
owner-occupied units at 115% of median income, as currently allowed by state and 2
federal law; and 3
d) The Legislature should pass legislation creating a workforce housing tax credit to spur 4
development of workforce housing. 5
e) The Legislature should scale the Workforce Housing Development Program to account 6
for the additional cost associated with the prevailing wage requirements. 7
f) The Legislature should streamline the provisions in Minn. Stat. § 469.175, subd. 3 8
required of cities to establish a workforce housing TIF district including eliminating the 9
provision that requires a city to determine average vacancy rates and county board and 10
school board approval for a workforce housing TIF plan before it is enacted and the 11
Legislature should also eliminate the sunset of the workforce housing TIF authority. 12
LE-34. Development Along Transit Corridors 13
Issue: While the establishment of transit lines and corridors provide the impetus for economic 14
development, there are limits to existing development tools that hinder full development of 15
transit corridors. For example, acquisition of land outside of the line but within the corridor can 16
be difficult, and current tools are not well-suited for the creation of public spaces, enhancement 17
of infrastructure, and investments such as parking ramps that are necessary components of a 18
transit-oriented development plan. 19
In 2008 the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) was authorized to 20
establish Transit Improvement Areas, which should complement long-term transportation 21
planning initiatives such as MAP-21 and Minnesota GO. Transit Improvement Areas include 22
parcels of land that are located in part within one-half mile of a transit station. A transit station is 23
defined as a physical structure or designated area which supports the interconnection of various 24
transportation modes, including light rail, commuter rail and bus rapid transit, and which 25
promotes and achieves the loading, discharging and transporting of people. The commissioner of 26
DEED may designate a Transit Improvement Area if it will increase the effectiveness of a mass 27
150
transit project by incorporating one or more modes of public transportation with commercial and 1
housing development, as well as providing a clean and pleasant place for pedestrian use. DEED 2
has designated over 50 Transit Improvement Areas; all but two are located in the seven-county 3
metropolitan area. Although the language passed and was signed into law by the governor 4
(Minn. Stat. § 469.35), there was no funding put into place to implement the new program. 5
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities urges the Legislature to increase the ability of 6
traditional economic development tools, including tax increment financing, tax abatement, 7
and special service districts, to address the needs of transit-oriented development. The 8
League encourages the Legislature to appropriate bonding and general fund dollars for 9
revolving loans and grants to fund the TIA program. Additionally, the Legislature should 10
consider adding park and ride facilities to the list of qualifying transportation modes, as 11
defined in Minn. Stat. § 469.351. Because the majority of the DEED-designated Transit 12
Improvement Areas are currently located in the seven-county metropolitan area, increased 13
funding for this program will not be balanced between greater Minnesota and the metro 14
area. Additional funding for this program should not change the overall balance of state 15
funding between greater Minnesota and the seven-county metropolitan area. 16
LE-35. Authority to Create Public Infrastructure Utilities 17
Issue: Successful economic development efforts and community stability are dependent upon a 18
city’s ability to make infrastructure investments. Current infrastructure funding options available 19
to cities are inadequate and unsustainable. Funding pressures have been exacerbated by levy 20
limits, unallotment and reductions in the local government aid and market value homestead 21
credit programs. The existing special assessment law, Minn. Stat. ch. 429, does not meet cities’ 22
financing needs because of the special benefit requirement. The law also requires a bond election 23
unless a minimum of 20 percent of such a project can be specially assessed against affected 24
properties due to the increase in fair market value or “benefit” from the project. In practice, 25
however, proof of increased property value to this degree of benefit can rarely be proven from 26
regular repair or replacement of existing infrastructure such as streets or sidewalks. Alternatives 27
to the Minn. Stat. ch. 429 methods for financing infrastructure improvements are nearly 28
nonexistent. 29
151
The Legislature has given cities the authority to operate utilities for waterworks, sanitary sewers, 1
and storm sewers. The storm sewer authority, established in 1983, set the precedent for a 2
workable process of charging a use fee on a utility bill for a city service infrastructure that is of 3
value to everyone in a city. Similar to the storm sewer authority, a transportation or sidewalk 4
utility would use technical, well-founded measurements and would equitably distribute the costs 5
of local infrastructure services. 6
Response: The Legislature should authorize cities to create, as a local option, additional 7
utilities such as a transportation or sidewalk utility, that ensure funding for the 8
maintenance of these public amenities. Additionally, whether established as a new chapter 9
of law or added to the list of service charges in Minn. Stat. § 429.101, cities should be able 10
to impose service charges against property to ensure the maintenance and safety of the 11
right of way for all Minnesotans without having to prove an increase in fair market value 12
or having to determine whether those contributing to the utility fund are taxable or tax-13
exempt. Such authority would acknowledge the effects of repeated levy limits and the 14
general funding shift from the state to local governments for building and maintaining 15
necessary infrastructure; the benefits to all taxpayers of a properly maintained public 16
infrastructure; and, the limitations of existing special assessment authority. 17
LE-36. Adequate Funding for Transportation* 18
Issue: A well-coordinated state transportation policy utilizing all modes of transportation in 19
moving passengers and freight will enhance the state economic development of new and 20
expanding business as well as foster additional tourism opportunities. 21
Response: More resources must be dedicated to all components of the state’s transportation 22
system, and local units of government must have access to resources and funding tools to 23
meet growing needs. The League of Minnesota Cities supports: 24
a) Development of a comprehensive state transportation policy which provides an 25
environment where all modes of transportation (motor, rail, air, water and pipeline) 26
complement each other in moving passengers and freight within the state. 27
152
b) AIncreased dedicated and sustainable state revenue source for non-municipal state aid 1
city streets. 2
c) The Statewide Transportation Plan 2009-2028 developed by the Minnesota Department 3
of Transportation (MnDOT). 4
d)c) MVST distribution of 60 percent for roads and bridges and 40 percent for transit. 5
e)d) A permanent increase in the gas tax. 6
f) Indexing of the gas tax, provided there is a limit on how much the tax can be increased 7
for inflation in a given amount of time. 8
g)e) Increases in vehicle registration taxes (tab fees). 9
h)f) Trunk highway bonding provided the Legislature implements reasonable 10
restrictions on the amount of debt service the state will incur, and provided the 11
Legislature appropriates funding to assist with local costs related to projects funded 12
with trunk highway bonds. 13
i)g) General obligation bonding for local roads and bridges, particularly for routes of 14
regional significance. 15
j)h) A sales tax increase dedicated to transportation. 16
k)i)Funding to assist cities burdened by cost participation responsibilities imposed by 17
improvement projects on the state’s principal arterial system and on the county state 18
aid highway (CSAH) system. 19
l)j) Funding for transportation components of economic development and redevelopment 20
projects. 21
m)k) Full funding for all components of state highway projects, including related 22
stormwater management systems, through state sources. 23
153
n)l)Establishment of a “Mainstreets Fund” to assist cities with non-transportation related 1
components of trunk highway projects such as utility upgrades and improvements that 2
contribute to economic development. 3
o)m) Funding to build roads to standards that can accommodate the year-round 4
transport of heavy loads. 5
p)n) A sales tax exemption for materials purchased for state and local road, bridge, 6
sidewalk, trail and transit construction projects. 7
q)o) Authority for cities to impose development impact fees for transportation 8
infrastructure. 9
r)p) Local funding options that would allow cities to raise revenues for roads, bridges, 10
sidewalks, trails, and transit. 11
s)q) Expanded use of alternative revenue sources such as MnPASS and other tolling 12
mechanisms for funding of maintenance and construction (where feasibility studies 13
indicate the program is appropriate). 14
LE-37. Turnbacks of County and State Roads 15
Issue: As road funding becomes increasingly inadequate, more roads are being “turned back” to 16
cities from counties and the state. 17
Response: Turnbacks should not occur without direct funding or transfer of a funding 18
source. A process of negotiation and mediation should govern the timing, funding, and 19
condition of turned-back roads. Agreements should be negotiated and finalized before 20
work on a project requiring a turnback begins. City taxpayers should receive the same 21
treatment as township taxpayers. The requirement for a public hearing, standards about 22
the conditions of turnbacks, and temporary maintenance funding should also apply to 23
county turnbacks to cities. At a minimum, roads that are proposed to be turned back to a 24
city government should be brought up to the standards of the receiving government, or 25
that city should be compensated with a direct payment. Direct funding should be provided 26
154
for smaller cities that are not provided with turnback financing through the municipal 1
state aid system. 2
LE-38. MnDOT Rights-of-Way Maintenance 3
Issue: Maintenance of property, including government property and facilities, is important to 4
public safety and to the image of Minnesota cities. Cities are acutely aware of the responsibility 5
they have for enforcing property maintenance codes pertaining to grass mowing, noxious weed 6
abatement, the placement of trash in yards and fence maintenance. 7
Minnesota has many miles of highways that run through cities. In recent years, the Minnesota 8
Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has cut a substantial percentage of its rights-of-way 9
management staff. The cuts have resulted in reduced maintenance along some corridors and on 10
parcels acquired by MnDOT for transportation purposes. Specifically, MnDOT has reduced the 11
frequency of mowing, litter collection, noxious weed abatement, graffiti abatement and repair of 12
fences and guard rails. This maintenance reduction has created public safety concerns, 13
undermined efforts to keep corridors attractive and presented challenges for communities 14
working to promote economic development. 15
Response: MnDOT must maintain state rights-of-way and parcels acquired by MnDOT for 16
transportation purposes located within city limits in a manner consistent with local 17
ordinances governing the upkeep of private property when requested by the city. 18
Alternatively, MnDOT should reimburse Minnesota cities for the labor, supplies, and 19
equipment necessary to maintain state rights-of-way to meet city standards and/or 20
minimize public safety hazards. The Legislature must provide MnDOT with adequate 21
funds to maintain state rights-of-way. 22
LE-39. Funding for Non-Municipal State Aid City Streets* 23
Issue: Minnesota has over 141,000 miles of roadway, and more than 22,500 miles—or 16 24
percent--are owned and maintained by Minnesota’s 853 cities. 25
The Minnesota Constitution limits eligibility for dedicated Highway User Tax Distribution Fund 26
dollars to up to twenty percent of streets in cities with populations over 5,000 (147 of 853 cities). 27
155
This means almost 85 percent of municipal streets are ineligible for municipal state aid (MSA) 1
funds and must be paid for with property taxes and special assessments. Funding challenges are 2
compounded by city cost participation requirements in state and county highway projects, which 3
divert resources from city-owned streets. 4
Recognizing the unique street funding needs in cities under 5,000 population, the 2015 5
legislature created the Small Cities Assistance Account (Minn. Stat. § 162.145). Funds in the 6
account are distributed through a formula to all cities under 5,000 population for street 7
maintenance and reconstruction. Unfortunately, funding for the account has only been provided 8
for three times. Because Small Cities Assistance funding has been provided so inconsistently, 9
small cities have had difficulty using the revenue stream as a tool to maximize pavement 10
management and street improvement planning. 11
Maintenance costs increase as road systems age, and no city--large or small—is spending enough 12
on roadway capital improvements to maintain a 50-year lifecycle. For every one dollar spent on 13
maintenance, a road authority--and therefore taxpayers--save seven dollars in repairs. According 14
to a report released in late 2012 by the governor’s Transportation Finance Advisory Committee, 15
cities collectively need an additional $400 million per year to bring city streets up to an 16
economically competitive standard. 17
In 2023 the legislature created the Transportation Advancement Account, which will provide 18
ongoing funding for the Small Cities Assistance Account and a new Larger Cities Assistance 19
Account. The revenues for this account have not yet been collected, and there will be a delay of 20
approximately two years before meaningful amounts of funding flow to these accounts. 21
Response: City streets are a separate but integral piece of the network of roads supporting 22
movement of people and goods. Cities need greater resources and flexible policies in order 23
to meet growing demands for street improvements and maintenance. The League of 24
Minnesota Cities supports: 25
a) A Increased dedicated and sustainable state funding source for non-MSA city streets in 26
large and small cities statewide; 27
156
a)b) One-time funding for the Small Cities Assistance Account and the Larger Cities 1
Assistance Account to bridge the gap between when the Transportation Advancement 2
Account was created and when funds will reach the account; 3
b)c) enabling legislation that would allow cities to create street improvement districts 4
(similar to sidewalk improvement districts already allowed under Minn. Stat. § 435.44); 5
and 6
c)d) the creation of a new fund within the Local Road Improvement Program that would 7
provide grants to cities burdened by cost participation requirements related to trunk 8
highway and county state-aid projects. 9
LE-40. Authority to Allow Amenities in MnDOT Rights-of-Way 10
Issue: Cities served by the state’s trunk highway system frequently request features on the 11
highway right-of-way (ROW) that would improve the aesthetics of the highway or provide 12
public amenities exceeding components the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation (MnDOT) may 13
include. Minn. Stat. §161.20, Subd. 2(b), gives the MnDOT commissioner authority to make 14
agreements with and cooperate with any governmental authority relating to trunk highway 15
construction and improvements; however, Minn. Stat. §161.434 provides that arrangements and 16
agreements must be “for highway purposes”. 17
These restrictions are problematic in cities where a downtown commercial area exists along a 18
trunk highway. Some of these cities desire amenities that would make commercial areas adjacent 19
to trunk highways more vibrant by allowing outdoor dining, landscaping, decorative lighting or 20
other aesthetic improvements that do not serve a highway purpose. Under current law, the city 21
cannot approve amenities that encroach on the ROW. 22
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports authorizing cities, by ordinance, to 23
allow amenities that do not serve highway purposes on trunk highway ROW within their 24
jurisdictions. The League also supports a requirement that MnDOT develop and approve 25
rules related to local ordinances. 26
157
LE-41. Complete Streets* 1
Issue: There is increasing public support for the reform of local street design policies to make 2
streets safer for pedestrians, cyclists and neighborhood residents. 3
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports reforms in state design guidelines for 4
local streets that would give cities greater flexibility to safely accommodate all modes of 5
travel, including walking and biking. The state should also provide incentives such as 6
grants to local units of government working to advance complete street projects. 7
Crosswalks and Safe Routes to School projects should be eligible for incentives. 8
The League opposes state imposed unfunded mandates that would increase the costs of 9
building streets in contexts where facilities for cyclists and pedestrians are unnecessary or 10
inappropriate. 11
LE-42. Authority to Implement Infrastructure Fees 12
Issue: New development and the resulting growth create an increased demand for public 13
infrastructure and other public facilities. Severe constraints on local fiscal resources and dramatic 14
forecasts for population growth have prompted cities to reconsider ways to pay for the inevitable 15
costs associated with new development. 16
Traditional financing methods tend to subsidize new development at the expense of the existing 17
community, discourage sound land-use planning, place inefficient pressures on public facilities, 18
and allow under-utilization of existing infrastructure. Consequently, local communities are 19
exploring methods to ensure new development pays its fair share of the true costs of growth. 20
In Harstad v. City of Woodbury, 916 N.W.2d 540 (Minn. 2018), the Minnesota Supreme Court 21
recently clarified that state statute does not provide the authority for cities to impose 22
infrastructure fees to fund future road improvements when approving subdivision applications 23
under Minn. Stat. § 462.358, subd. 2a. Given the existing authorization to impose fees on new 24
development of other infrastructure, such as water, sanitary and storm sewer, and for park 25
purposes, it is reasonable to extend the concept to additional public infrastructure and facilities 26
improvement also necessitated by new development. 27
158
Response: The Legislature should authorize local units of government to impose 1
infrastructure fees so new development pays its fair share of the off-site, as well as the on-2
site, costs of public infrastructure and other public facilities needed to adequately serve 3
new development. 4
LE-43. Safe Routes to School Grants Management 5
Issue: The Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Program provides funding support for capital projects 6
that promote and encourage more students to walk or bicycle to school by making the school 7
routes safer and more accessible. 8
The following are some types of SRTS infrastructure improvement grants that are provided by 9
the state and offered through the Minnesota Dept. of Transportation (MnDOT): 10
a) School site improvements: secure bicycle parking facilities, traffic diversion improvements, 11
and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements; 12
b) Pedestrian facilities: new sidewalk, sidewalk gap closures, and related ADA improvements; 13
c) Bicycle facilities: bicycle trails, separated multi-use or shared paths and related ADA 14
improvements; and 15
d) Traffic calming and crossing improvements: curb extensions, speed humps, median refuges, 16
enhanced crosswalk markings, timed on/off beacons, vehicle feedback signs (dynamic speed 17
signs), and other traffic control devices. 18
Cities that receive municipal state aid (MSA)--those with populations above 5,000--may apply 19
for and administer their own SRTS grants. Non-MSA cities, even those with a city engineer on 20
staff or contract, must rely on the county to manage any grant funds secured as well as to 21
approve the project design. In some cities, this requirement has led to project delays and disputes 22
with counties over project design and delivery. 23
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports changes to MnDOT rules to allow 24
small cities that have the capacity to manage SRTS grants and projects to do so without 25
county approval. 26
159
LE-44. Railroads* 1
Issue: Railroads impose far-reaching and long-term impacts on communities. The impact of 2
railroads on communities has become more pronounced in Minnesota as the number and length 3
of trains have increased due to frac sand and crude oil entering the state by rail to and from North 4
Dakota. While railroads often support economic activity and can relieve pressure on roadway 5
and bridge infrastructure, they also bring noise, environmental impacts and safety challenges. 6
Below are some of the concerns cities have raised about railroads: 7
a) Local public safety personnel are underequipped to respond to a potential derailment of a 8
train carrying hazardous materials such as crude oil or nuclear products. 9
b) The cost-share ratio related to roadway crossing improvements is borne disproportionately by 10
the public sector. Some estimates are 80 percent public to 20 percent private funding, 11
regardless of the public entity’s ability to pay or whether service is provided within the 12
community. Funding has not kept pace with the growing need for grade separations. 13
c) Legislation brought by the railroad industry that would exempt railroads from stormwater 14
fees and assessments and shift the cost of complying with stormwater management to other 15
property owners. 16
d) The financial burden is faced by the public sector to deal with mitigation improvements, a 17
cost that the Surface Transportation Board (STB) is not requiring the private sector to pay. 18
e) At-grade crossings are blocked by both long moving trains and by trains that stop and remain 19
stopped, sometimes for hours at a time. Blocked crossings delay motorists and sometimes 20
prevent passage of emergency vehicles. 21
f) Difficulty and expense of imposing and enforcing whistleblowing ordinances. 22
g) Unabated graffiti on railroad cars and structures. 23
h) Negative impacts of long- and short-term storage of rail cars on adjacent properties. 24
i) Pre-emption of local and state authority to regulate railroad activities. 25
160
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities opposes legislation and policies that 1
disproportionately shift authority, costs and/or liability away from railroad companies and 2
onto other entities. The railroad industry, along with state and federal government, must: 3
a) Adequately mitigate the negative impacts of railroads on communities; 4
b) Allow local governments to enforce the existing state and federal laws regarding the 5
maximum time a crossing may be blocked, and provide a mechanism to do so; 6
c) Provide that timely notice to the impacted municipality is required in advance when a 7
crossing or crossings will be blocked by a stopped train; 8
d) Require railroad companies to provide a direct emergency response telephone number 9
for city first responders (police, fire, ambulance or other designated official) to call 10
when an at-grade crossing is blocked, and the emergency services need this crossing 11
immediately unblocked to continue their response; 12
e) Allow local governments to enforce whistle-free zones; 13
f) Impose and implement safety standards that are in the best interest of the public, 14
including requiring every train that is carrying freight to be operated with a crew of at 15
least two crewmembers; 16
g) Equip and train local public safety officials to respond to potential catastrophic rail 17
incidents; 18
h) Develop plans and identify funding sources for more grade separations between 19
railways and roadways; and 20
i) Fund and implement improvements to rail car storage facilities. 21
The public sector should not incur the costs of improvements sought by the private sector, 22
and cities should not be required to fund most of the cost of crossing repairs or 23
improvements. The federal government must exercise greater oversight of the STB to 24
ensure fair and equitable solutions are reached when dealing with cities in Minnesota. 25
161
Finally, the Minnesota Department of Transportation’s (MnDOT’s) Office of Freight and 1
Passenger Rail should advocate on behalf of local communities when conflicts between 2
cities and railroad entities arise. 3
LE-45. Airport Planning and Funding 4
Issue: Airports are an essential component of Minnesota’s transportation infrastructure. Airports 5
in the State of Minnesota serve important gateway to the region, the nation, and global markets. 6
They serve as a primary access point to our national airport system. The Minneapolis St. Paul 7
International Airport (MSP) is critical to the movement of people and goods in and out of the 8
state and even with all the planned improvements, it will eventually reach its capacity. The state 9
needs to implement a long-term strategy to make better use of other airport facilities and existing 10
resources, reduce environmental impacts, and achieve sound and sustainable economic growth 11
throughout the state. 12
Aviation planning is a multi-layered effort with different levels of responsibilities. Currently, the 13
State Airports System Plan is put together by MnDOT with individual pieces developed by the 14
Federal Aviation Agency (FAA), Metropolitan Council (MC), and Metropolitan Airports 15
Commission (MAC). Aviation planning could be improved by a more unified statewide effort 16
and coordination of the various aviation strategies through creation of an oversight body. 17
Minn. Stat. § 360.017 establishes the State Airport Fund and authorizes the Minnesota 18
Department of Transportation (MnDOT) Office of Aeronautics to support cities, counties and 19
townships in the planning, development, maintenance and safe operation of public airports. In 20
recent years, in order to help balance the state’s budget, the Legislature transferred funds from 21
the State Airport Fund to the General Fund. Although the borrowed funds were eventually 22
repaid in full, efforts to preserve and improve the quality of airports throughout the state were 23
hindered by the unavailability of these revenues. 24
The Minnesota Council of Airports (MCOA), a membership organization for airport authorities 25
and municipal entities who own airports, has led efforts to bring stakeholders together. Most 26
recently, the MCOA established the State Airports Fund Committee to work with the MnDOT 27
162
Office of Aeronautics to discuss and advise future management practices of the State Airport 1
Fund. 2
Response: The state needs a higher degree of integration of agencies (FAA, MnDOT, MC, 3
and MAC) and communities related to aviation planning. The League of Minnesota Cities 4
supports the collaborative efforts initiated by the MCOA and supports the development of 5
a statewide airport advisory board, which could provide input, review and make 6
recommendations to assist in development of a comprehensive statewide State Airports 7
System Plan. 8
The state needs to make planning and investment decisions that will maximize the potential 9
for airports to become economic development centers that provide access to domestic and 10
global marketplaces. Investments in airports allow existing businesses to remain and grow, 11
help attract new businesses, increase employment, and lower product and service costs for 12
the benefit of the region. 13
Finally, the Legislature should not authorize shifting of dedicated State Airports Fund 14
dollars to resolve general fund deficits 15
LE-46. Airport Safety Zones 16
Issue: The field of aeronautics is regulated generally by Minn. Stat. ch. 360 and Chapter 8800 of 17
the Minnesota Rules. Land use safety zones and other public airport zoning standards are 18
established in Minnesota Rules Chapter 8800.2400, and are adopted by local airport zoning 19
regulations that are submitted to the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) 20
commissioner for review and approval before adoption. Airport safety zones are intended to 21
restrict land uses that may be hazardous to the operational safety of aircraft using the public 22
airport, and to protect the safety and property of people on the ground in the area near the public 23
airport. 24
While some of the provisions included in the Minnesota Rules are required by the Federal 25
Aviation Administration (FAA), other provisions go well beyond the federal requirements. In 26
163
some cases, the Minnesota Rules do not make sense for the community served by a public 1
airport. 2
Finally, in some cases airports cross multiple municipal jurisdictions. Neither state law nor 3
Minnesota Rules provide powers for joint airport zoning boards. These boards could be useful in 4
resolving interjurisdictional issues involving airport planning, development, funding and zoning. 5
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports efforts to protect the safety and 6
property of people living and working near public airports. The League also recognizes 7
that the Minnesota Rules related to public airport zoning standards exceed the FAA’s and 8
other states’ standards and, thus, needlessly infringe on local control. The League supports 9
changes to Minnesota Rules pertaining to airport zoning standards that will more closely 10
align Minnesota’s Rules with those in other states, while at the same time retaining local 11
authority to be more restrictive than the Minnesota Rules. The League also supports 12
changes to Minnesota Statutes and Minnesota Rules that would authorize powers for joint 13
airport zoning boards so issues related to funding, staffing, and authority to enforce 14
ordinances can be resolved at the local level.15
16
164
LE-NEW A. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Vehicle Miles Traveled 1
Assessment Requirements on Trunk Highway Projects* 2
Issue: For all grade separation and capacity improvement projects on the trunk highway system 3
that are not in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) or have not submitted a 4
layout to the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) for approval by February 2025, 5
state statute requires assessments of greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled. The law 6
applies to capacity improvement projects with a cost of $15 million or more in the metro area and 7
$5 million or more in Greater Minnesota. If the project is not in conformance with established 8
greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled reduction targets, there must be a change in 9
the scope or design of the project, sufficient impact mitigation and a revised assessment. If these 10
conditions are not met, the project must be halted and disallowed from inclusion in the STIP. The 11
requirements in this law will significantly increase costs on important future highway expansion 12
and interchange projects in Minnesota. Further, the law fails to acknowledge safety needs and 13
regional economic benefits. 14
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the administration and management of 15
this legislation on a programmatic, or statewide, level versus at the project level to best 16
encourage investment in transit and other projects that provide the greatest return on 17
investment while also not unduly burdening Greater Minnesota projects where mitigation 18
efforts may not be as efficient or implementable. The League also supports removing the 19
vehicle miles traveled assessments as a requirement when a project improves greenhouse gas 20
emissions. In Greater Minnesota, where feasible transit solutions do not uniformly exist, 21
there must be reasonable alternatives for greenhouse gas emissions offsets. New interchanges 22
should be exempt from both assessments when the project provides economic benefits. Safety 23
improvement projects aimed at reducing fatalities should also be exempt due to public safety 24
benefits.25
165
LE-NEW B. Comprehensive Plans and Environmental Review* 1
Issue: Comprehensive plans are essential guiding documents for cities and typically allow for a 2
wide range of development outcomes. To allow for local flexibility and functionality, as well as 3
to best align local goals with regional requirements, it is essential that local plans represent a 4
city’s plans and vision at a high and broad level. Recent litigation, if successful, could require 5
local comprehensive plans to meet the standards of the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act 6
(MERA), even though environmental impacts cannot be measured at the time of planning. This 7
litigation threatens the autonomy of cities to conduct long term planning. 8
Response: The legislature should clarify that cities’ comprehensive plans are exempt from 9
review under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (MERA). 10
11
166
HUMAN RESOURCES & DATA PRACTICES1
HR-1. Personnel Mandates and Limits on Local Control* 2
Issue: Many state laws increase the cost of providing city services to residents by requiring city 3
governments to provide certain levels of compensation or benefits to public employees such as 4
paid family and medical leave and earned sick and safe time, by specifying certain working 5
conditions, or by limiting city governments’ ability to effectively manage their personnel 6
resources. For instance, existing state laws limit governments’ ability to effectively address 7
incompetence or misconduct of city employees by specifying certain procedures or standards of 8
conduct that cities must follow. Additionally, state law limits the tools that cities can use to 9
recruit and retain talent which creates challenges during times of low unemployment and a 10
competitive labor market. Finally, several laws are potentially contradictory and force local 11
governments to choose which one to follow. 12
Response: Any new legislation and changes to existing legislation should meet the following 13
goals: 14
a) Recognize the need for local decision-making authority by local elected officials with 15
regard to the terms and conditions of employment for local government employees (e.g. 16
allow local elected officials to determine employee compensation, employee recognition, 17
and to make employee benefit decisions, and allow greater flexibility in how cities may 18
utilize public funds for the recruitment and retention of employees in an ever changing 19
job market). 20
b) Provide funding that pays the full costs of any mandated employment-related 21
expenditures, including, for example, the new sick leave mandates. 22
c) Avoid and eliminate expensive and time-consuming duplicative legal protections and 23
processes for public employees, including those that preclude promotional probationary 24
periods. 25
d) Eliminate contradictory existing laws regarding public employment. 26
167
e) Eliminate mandates for local government employers that are not imposed upon the 1
state as an employer. 2
f) Use the collective bargaining process established by state law, rather than legal 3
mandates, to determine benefits for employees covered by collective bargaining 4
agreements. 5
HR-2. Earned Sick and Safe Time* 6
Issue: The 2023 legislature enacted a law requiring that all employers provide employees one 7
hour of sick and safe time for every 30 hours worked. This law required employees to be eligible 8
to accrue up to 48 hours in a year and 80 hours ongoing after the first year of employment. The 9
law does not have any exemptions for seasonal employees or unique positions that cities may 10
have such as paid on-call fire fighters, election judges, and paid councilmembers. For these 11
positions, it is difficult for cities to apply the new law’s requirements due to their unique and 12
limited employee-employer relationship. 13
In recent years, there have been legislative proposals to require employers to provide “earned 14
sick and safe time” affording employees one hour of sick and safe time for every 30 hours 15
worked. Cities recognize their employees for their dedication to public service and currently 16
provide a wide variety of excellent benefits to their employees and prioritize the health and well-17
being of staff. Benefits include paid time off for most staff who are required to be enrolled in the 18
Public Employee Retirement Association (PERA) (Minn. Stat. § 353.01, subds. 2a, 2b). In 19
developing leave and benefit policies, cities must be mindful of the cost to citizens for programs, 20
much of which are driven by staff compensation and benefits. 21
Response: The legislature should amend Minn. Stat. § 181.9445, subd. 5 to incorporate a 22
well-defined “public employee” definition, not to include unique positions in which there is 23
not a formal employer-employee relationship such as paid on-call fire fighters, elected 24
officials, election judges, or other non-traditional positions. 25
To avoid significant cost increases and to provide clarity, the Legislature should use the 26
same eligibility requirements for public employees outlined in state statute for PERA 27
168
participation if a mandatory sick and sick and safe time program is enacted by the 1
Legislature. 2
HR-3. Pay Equity Compliance 3
Issue: In 1984, the Legislature passed the Local Government Pay Equity Act to eliminate sex-4
based wage disparities in public employment. The Act requires each local government to submit 5
reports of its pay structure to the state’s Pay Equity Compliance Coordinator within the 6
Department of Management and Budget. The data is then subject to analysis to determine if there 7
are inequities in the city’s pay structure. Since its passage, the administrative rules implementing 8
the Act have not substantively changed. 9
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the Local Government Pay Equity Act 10
and seeks to partner with the Legislature and the state’s Pay Equity Compliance 11
Coordinator to update and improve the current system so that cities can more efficiently 12
and effectively fulfill the mandated reporting requirements. Local governments and the 13
state should: 14
a) Explore and document problems individual local governments are experiencing, and 15
evaluate whether the problems are widespread and if they can be resolved 16
administratively; 17
b) Evaluate the reporting process, and make recommendations for improvement as 18
needed; 19
c) Review the methodology for analyzing pay equity data; and 20
d) Evaluate the process by which cities receive notification of reporting requirements and 21
compliance issues and make recommendations for improvement as needed. 22
HR-4. Public Employment Labor Relations Act (PELRA)* 23
Issue: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the purpose of the Public Employment Labor 24
Relations Act (PELRA) to balance the rights and interests of public employees, public 25
employers, and the general public. However, certain changes are necessary to assist public 26
169
employers in implementing this law. For example, current definitions of “public employee” are 1
confusing and difficult to manage. In addition, the arbitration process has produced decisions 2
that are contrary to the interests of the public, and the legal standard for overturning arbitration 3
decisions is very difficult to meet. Also, recent interpretations of Minn. Stat. § 179A.25 4
(independent review of non-union employee grievances) has created uncertainty and confusion 5
in the longstanding judicial process used by courts to review city council administrative 6
decisions, particularly employment termination decisions of non-union employees. 7
Additionally, the 2023 legislative session resulted in changes to PELRA that diminish essential 8
employer rights to conduct operations and provide public services. The new law removed 9
number of personnel as an inherent managerial right and added staffing ratios to the terms and 10
conditions of employment subject to collective bargaining. It is unclear how this new condition 11
would be bargained. Additionally, limiting public employers from determining the number of 12
personnel hired for various positions could hinder the ability to respond expeditiously in a crisis, 13
limits their ability to be responsive to taxpayers, and subjects them to risk if they are unable to 14
meet bargained terms due to external challenges such as a competitive labor market. 15
Response: Minn. Stat. ch. 179A should be modified to: 16
a) Change the definition of “public employee” under PELRA by removing the existing 14-17
hour/67-day requirement and replace it with a definition in which employees must work 18
an annual average of 20 hours or more per week. 19
b) Exclude temporary or seasonal employees, as well as unpaid volunteers, from the 20
PELRA definition of public employee in Minn. Stat. ch. 179A. 21
c) Provide different options for accessing arbitrators and utilizing the arbitration process 22
in order to “address inequities” between union and management representatives. 23
d) Allow public employers to bypass mandatory arbitration required under PELRA and 24
directly access the district court or Office of Administrative Hearings system in 25
situations where an employee is being terminated for gross misconduct (e.g., excessive 26
use of force, sexual harassment, sexual abuse, theft or a felony conviction) that is 27
related to the employee’s position with the public employer, including establishment of 28
170
a standard that defers to the public employer’s decision on termination if it has met a 1
standard of reasonableness. 2
e) Repeal Minn. Stat. § 179A.25 or, in lieu of repeal, exclude employment terminations 3
from Minn. Stat. § 179A.25; require a 60-day timeframe for filing a petition for review 4
of a grievance under Minn. Stat. § 179A.25; and clarify that decisions of Bureau of 5
Mediation Services (BMS) under this section are non-binding and merely advisory. 6
f) The League opposes legislation that would propose employer payment of grievance 7
arbitration fees when a settlement is offered to a grievant and declined. 8
f)g)League opposes legislation that diminish or restrict inherent managerial rights of public 9
employers. 10
HR-5. Implications of Janus v. AFSCME 11
Issue: Historically, both members and non-members of public sector unions could opt out of 12
paying the portion of dues that explicitly go to the union’s political activities. But, until recently, 13
non-members were still required to pay what was called a “fair share” fee, allegedly because 14
even non-members receive the benefits of union representation. Union dues are deducted from 15
employee paychecks by employers based on notification of membership provided by labor 16
unions. 17
Overruling decades of precedent, in June 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it is 18
unconstitutional for public employees who object to belonging to a union to be required to pay a 19
fair share fee. (Janus v. AFSCME). Specifically, the Supreme Court held that laws compelling 20
fair share dues from unwilling members violated the First Amendment by requiring these 21
employees to, in effect, pay for speech with which they do not agree, and that affirmative, 22
voluntary consent is required for dues deduction. Given the degree of uncertainty about the 23
implications of the ruling, public employees are seeking information about their constitutional 24
rights regarding labor union membership and associated dues. The Minnesota Public 25
Employment Labor Relations Act defines unfair labor practices (“ULPs”) to include dominating 26
or interfering with the formation, existence, or administration of union membership. To avoid a 27
potential allegation that they have engaged in unfair labor practices, if employees seek 28
information about union membership from their employers, employers often refer their 29
171
employees to union representatives for additional information. The Minnesota Bureau of 1
Mediation Services (BMS) is the state agency charged with providing technical training and 2
information on collective bargaining for the public sector in Minnesota. BMS would be an ideal 3
resource for employees to find critical information about labor union membership, particularly in 4
the wake of the recent Supreme Court ruling. 5
Additionally, as public sector unions are examining methods to compensate for fair share 6
revenue that may now be lost, laws have been proposed in states outside of Minnesota, which 7
preempt the bargaining process and impose new requirements on public employers. Some of the 8
proposed requirements are designed to help unions market their services to their members or to 9
require the public employers to pay the costs of collective bargaining. 10
Response: To ensure that both public employers and public employees successfully navigate 11
the current unknowns following the Janus decision, the League of Minnesota Cities urges 12
BMS to provide and disseminate information to employees about union membership across 13
the state. The League also urges the Legislature to act to protect public employers against: 14
a) ULP charges when providing factual information to employees about union 15
membership; 16
b) ULP charges when requiring unions to provide original documentation of voluntary 17
consent to dues deduction; and 18
c) being forced to pay the direct cost of employee representation by unions. 19
HR-6. Public Employment Relations Board* 20
Issue: Dating back to the 1970’s, Minnesota had a Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) 21
in place, but over time, its responsibilities were changed and reassigned to another bureau. Until 22
the reemergence of the PERB in 2014, unfair labor practices (ULPs) actions could be brought in 23
Minnesota District Courts through injunctive relief. In 2014, the Legislature recreated PERB to 24
hear ULPs filed by employees, employers and labor unions under the Public Employment Labor 25
Relations Act (PELRA). The board was created in Minn. Stat. ch. 179A and after receiving 26
initial funding, the board has yet to be fully funded or operational. Much of the current statutory 27
172
language regarding implementation should be amended to ensure the PERB operates 1
successfully and efficiently for both public employees and employers. 2
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the structure and process to address 3
ULPs that was utilized before the reestablishment of the PERB in 2014. If the PERB is 4
implemented fully and funded sufficiently, the League of Minnesota Cities encourages the 5
Legislature to make the following changes: 6
a) Create statutory authority for the PERB to establish a fee-based structure for filing 7
ULPs and to pay for hearing officers, with costs to be shared by employers and 8
authorized representatives; 9
b) Allow the PERB to defer to the decisions made by an arbitrator to prevent duplicative 10
litigation on the same issue; and 11
c) Amend the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and the Open Meeting Law to 12
properly maintain the integrity of the hearing process. 13
HR-7. Essential Employees 14
Issue: Cities must balance the health, welfare, and safety of the public with the costs to 15
taxpayers. Essential employee status removes the right to strike but gives the right to mandatory 16
binding arbitration. This status can result in arbitration awards that exceed the city’s budget or 17
conflict with the city’s compensation policy. 18
Response: The Legislature should carefully examine requests from interest groups seeking 19
essential employee status under Minn. Stat. ch. 179A (PELRA). The League of Minnesota 20
Cities opposes legislation that mandates arbitration that increases costs and removes local 21
decision-making authority. 22
The League supports a mandate for Final Offer/Total Package arbitration for all essential 23
groups on a trial basis. The League also supports a change in the PELRA law that would 24
strengthen existing language (Minn. Stat. § 179A.16, subd. 7) requiring arbitrators to 25
consider a public employer’s obligation to efficiently manage their operations. Specifically, 26
173
the statute should be amended to require arbitrators to take into consideration any wage 1
adjustments already given to or negotiated with other groups – both union and non-union 2
for the same employer in the same contract year. 3
HR-8. Re-employment Benefits 4
Issue: Cities are often required to help pay the benefits of workers who have initially been 5
denied benefits through their employment with the city but later been re-employed by a different 6
employer; sometimes this occurs when the employee has been found to have committee gross 7
misconduct while employed by the city. 8
Additionally, employers are prohibited from entering into agreements with employees not to 9
contest or appeal payment of unemployment benefits as part of a settlement agreement at 10
termination of employment. Because most cities are “reimbursement employers,” the majority 11
of the cost of benefits paid to the employee are at the direct expense of the city. The ability to 12
enter into such an agreement can greatly aid a city in reaching a settlement at a relatively low-13
cost to the city’s taxpayers. 14
Response: Cities should not be forced to pay benefits as base wage employers if the 15
employee is determined to have committed gross misconduct during their employment with 16
the city, even if the employee voluntarily resigns. In addition, cities (as reimbursement 17
employers) should be allowed to enter into agreements with employees to not contest a 18
determination of eligibility for unemployment benefits where the employer and employee 19
mutually agree to this as a term of separation. 20
HR-9. Public Employee Defined Benefit Pension Plans* 21
Issue: Public pensions are an important employee benefit that can help cities attract and retain 22
employees. However, unlike salary and other employee benefits that are established by each city, 23
the pension contribution rates and benefit levels are set by the state legislature. Benefit levels and 24
plan costs must be carefully balanced to assure long-term sustainability of the pension plans and 25
affordability to employers and employees. Despite ongoing funding issues, the Legislature and 26
174
Governor had been unable to reach agreement on sustainability changes to the Public Employees 1
Retirement Association plans. 2
In 2018, the Legislature enacted a major pension reform package to improve the long-term 3
financial status of the PERA pension plans. The legislation included benefit reductions for active 4
employees, contribution increases for Police and Fire Plan employers and active employees and a 5
modified cost of living adjustment (COLA) for retirees. 6
Acknowledging rapidly rising inflation and public sector recruitment and retention issues during 7
the 2022 session, legislators discussed modifications to public pensions, including enhanced 8
cost-of-living adjustments for retirees as well as reductions to the employee contribution rates for 9
both the PERA Police and Fire Plan (-2.4 percent of salary) as well as the General Plan (-0.25 10
percent of salary). In order to implement these contribution reductions, the initial proposal would 11
have modified the statutory language defining the employer/employee contribution split for the 12
P&F plan to specify that “employers shall contribute not less than 60 percent and employees 13
shall not contribute more than 40 percent” of the required total contribution, which could result 14
in an annual battle between employers and employees over the financial responsibility for the 15
necessary contributions. 16
Under these proposals, the financial impact to the plans would be offset by additional direct aid. 17
Unfortunately, the aid appropriation for the contribution reduction proposal was static while the 18
impact of the contribution reduction on regular wage growth would have eroded the funding 19
level of the plans over time. 20
The 2023 omnibus Pensions bill appropriated a total of $485.9 million in one-time state aid, 21
allocated to the plans roughly on the basis of accrued liabilities, and provided a one-time COLA 22
increase. Due to the one-time nature of budget target for the Pensions bill, no significant 23
structural changes were made to PERA plans. 24
The bill also reduced the actuarial assumption for investment return from 7.5% to 7%, effective 25
June 30, 2023, and reduced the number of years of service required for full vesting from five 26
years to three years for all members of the PERA General Plan. 27
175
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the sustainability modifications 1
enacted by the legislature in 2018 and continues to oppose any benefit improvements for 2
retirees or active employees until the financial health of the General Plan and the Police 3
and Fire Plan is restored. 4
For the PERA General Plan, any further increases in employer contributions should only 5
be considered by the Legislature after other measures have been considered, including: 6
a) An increase in employee contributions so that employees and employers truly bear the 7
same responsibility to bring the pension plans to full funding; or 8
b) The removal of the cap on PERA Pension Aid payments under Minn. Stat. § 273.1385 9
and the extension of the aid program after FY2020, so the state equalizes the 10
contributions of employees and employers. 11
The League also supports: 12
a) Fully offsetting the additional unfunded liability of any proposed employee contribution 13
reduction with direct state aid to the plan. 14
b) Modifications to the PERA eligibility guidelines to take into account temporary, 15
seasonal, unique part-time, and student employment situations in cities, particularly in 16
recreational operations. These modifications should include the use of pro-rated service 17
credit, which would make PERA consistent with the other major Minnesota pension 18
plans. 19
c) A comprehensive review of exclusions from pension participation with the goal of 20
simplifying current eligibility guidelines. Such a review should also include a possible 21
revision of current penalties for employers that fail to report covered employees to 22
ensure that these penalties are not overly harsh and punitive. 23
d) The transfer of all school district employees out of the PERA General Plan and into 24
another fund that is more appropriate for school district employees as long as the 25
change would not negatively impact the financial health of the pension funds nor result 26
in employer contribution increases. The continued authority of cities to effectively use 27
176
retirees in reemployment situations. The League supports policy changes which would 1
include an increase in the earnings threshold for such retirees and supports keeping the 2
required break in service at 30 days and opposes suspending payments to retirees. 3
For PERA Police and Fire, any further increases in employer contributions should only be 4
considered by the Legislature after other measures have been considered, including: 5
a) An initial increase in the employee contribution of at least 1.0% of salary with 6
subsequent increases split evenly between employee and employer so that the 7
contribution ratio moves toward a more equitable split between employees and 8
employers; or 9
b) An additional state general fund appropriation to fund the deficiency in police and fire 10
pension aid payments so that the state equalizes the contributions of employers and 11
employees. 12
c) Increasing the minimum and full retirement ages for new PERA Police and Fire plan 13
participants. 14
d) Implementing a contribution-based benefit formula that would align benefits payable 15
with contributions made on behalf of an employee in order to address high-five spiking 16
issues. 17
The League also supports: 18
a) Maintaining the current 60/40 contribution split between employers and employees. 19
b) Fully offsetting the additional unfunded liability of any proposed employee contribution 20
reduction with direct state aid to the plan. 21
c) Maintaining the statutory changes made to Minn. Stat. § 353.01 in 2007 that separate 22
injuries resulting from “hazardous duties” from injuries resulting from “non-23
hazardous duties” for purposes of police and fire disability retirement benefits. 24
177
d) A thorough study by PERA of the current effects of overtime accumulation and outside 1
employment compensation on individual pension benefits and the overall funding of the 2
plan. The study should also include recommendations on whether the overtime or 3
outside employment should be factored into or excluded from high five average wage 4
calculations. 5
e) Allowing cities, including cities with combination (full-time and paid-on call staff) fire 6
departments, to work with their fire relief associations to determine the best application 7
of fire state aid. 8
For PERA Corrections Plan the League supports: 9
a) Maintaining the current definition of covered employees for the PERA corrections plan, 10
which does not include dispatchers due to the substantial differences between the job 11
responsibilities of dispatchers and the existing corrections positions covered by this 12
plan. 13
b) Fully offsetting the additional unfunded liability of any proposed employee contribution 14
reduction with direct state aid to the plan. 15
For all PERA defined benefit plans the League supports: 16
a) Adjustments to the benefits for active members and retirees to reduce the cost of the 17
plans. 18
b) Requiring special legislation for individual employee pension benefit increases be 19
initiated or approved by the city council of the impacted city unless the cost of the 20
benefit increase is fully covered by the individual or the legislation addresses a clerical 21
or administrative error. 22
c) Requiring PERA to collect and consider all employer-provided information, including 23
independent medical examinations and other relevant personnel data and to broaden 24
the basis for appealing disability determination decisions. 25
178
HR-10. Deferred Compensation 1
Issue: Cities and other local units of government have been offering employees the option to 2
invest in deferred compensation programs under 457(b) of the federal Internal Revenue Code. 3
Minn. Stat.§ 356.24, subd. 3 imposes requirements for the plan administrator or vendor of a 4
deferred compensation plan to: (1) provide the fee disclosure document to the plan’s participants, 5
and (2) file the fee disclosure document with the executive director of the LCPR (Legislative 6
Commission on Pensions and Retirement) within 30 days of the end of each fiscal year of the 7
plan. If a 457(b) plan administrator or vendor fails to comply with the reporting requirements, 8
the plan would potentially be an unlawful recipient of public funds that are made by a city on 9
behalf of an employee. 10
These new requirements are ambiguous and confusing. For example, it is unclear whether the 11
prohibition on contributing “public funds” to a 457(b) plan includes situations where cities allow 12
unused leave or unused health insurance contributions to be converted to a monetary 13
contribution. 14
The law should also specify that any deferred compensation plan authorized by Internal Revenue 15
Service regulations for local units of government are also authorized by the state. 16
Response: The Minn. Stat. § 356.24, subd. 3 reporting requirements enacted in 2020 for 17
457(b) deferred compensation plans are confusing, unclear and unnecessary and should be 18
repealed. At minimum, the requirements need to clearly define what constitutes public 19
funds, and exempt public employers that do not contribute public funds to a 457(b) plan 20
from the reporting requirements. In addition, the law should be amended to include all 21
IRS-approved deferred compensation plans that are authorized for local units of 22
government. 23
HR-11. State Paid PoliceContinued Health Insurance for Duty Disabled Peace 24
Officers and Firefighters Medical Insurance* 25
Issue: Minn. Stat. § 299A.465 requires public employers to continue health insurance benefits 26
for firefighters and peace officers injured in the line of duty. When the law was enacted in 1997, 27
179
it contained a provision requiring the Department of Public Safety (DPS) to reimburse employers 1
for the full amount of administering this benefit. 2
By 2002, the fund created to provide this benefit became deficient. Instead of increasing the 3
fund, the 2003 Legislature amended the law to pro-rate reimbursements to cities based on the 4
amount available and the number of eligible applicants. The 2003 law change triggered a 5
significant and unanticipated cost to cities. The cost has increased every year for cities, and the 6
funding for the account has never been increased. Even if the health insurance benefit was 7
discontinued entirely, the costs for existing recipients will substantially increase well into the 8
future due to the growing cost of health insurance. 9
In 2015, the Legislature expanded the health insurance benefit to include survivors of volunteer 10
firefighters who die in the line of duty. This change increased the number of firefighters eligible 11
for this benefit from 2,000 to 20,000—without increasing funding for the reimbursement 12
account. 13
A League-supported bill that passed in 2023 reinstated full funding to reimburse employers for 14
the cost of the continued health insurance benefit; however, the one-time funding appropriated is 15
expected to run out in approximately three years. 16
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the following legislative actions to 17
address the funding deficiency in this programaddequately fund the continued health 18
insurance mandate: 19
a) The state must fully fund programs that pay for health insurance for police and fire 20
employees injured in the line of duty and dependents of police and fire employees killed 21
in the line of duty as originally required under Minn. Stat. § 299A.465. 22
b) The Llegislature must avoid further expansion of eligibility for benefits under Minn. 23
Stat. § 299A.465 unless 1) full funding for benefits is provided by the state; and 2) 24
beneficiaries can be enrolled in a state health insurance plan such as the Public 25
Employees Insurance Program (PEIP). 26
180
c) Cumulative injuries that occur over time in the job should not qualify a police officer or 1
firefighter for benefits under Minn. Stat. § 299A.465 since these types of cumulative 2
injuries are not unique to the dangers of police officer and firefighter duties. 3
d) The Llegislature must clarify that the amount of an employer’s contribution under 4
Minn. Stat. § 299A.465 is no greater than that given to active employees in the same job 5
class. 6
e) The Llegislature must establish the minimum criteria used to determine ability to work 7
and set a percentage threshold of disability for eligibility into this program. At a 8
minimum, the Llegislature must identify that a workers’ compensation determination 9
as to whether the injury is work-related is necessary in order to receive the benefits 10
under Minn. Stat. § 299A.465. 11
f) Employees who receive a police and fire disability retirement benefit and accept 12
another job that offers them group health benefits should be required to pay for their 13
group health benefits with the city should they decide to continue them. The 14
Llegislature must amend Minn. Stat. § 299A.465 to reflect that employees are required 15
to inform the city when they become eligible for coverage under another group plan 16
and that failure to do so is grounds for termination from the benefits granted under 17
Minn. Stat. § 299A.465. 18
g) The legislature should establish a task force to study the long-term costs of this 19
program, including funding for an actuarial consultant, and make recommendations on 20
changes to make it more financially feasible for Minnesota taxpayers. 21
HR-12. Health Care Insurance Programs 22
Issue: Cities, like other employers in the state, are struggling with the rising costs of health care 23
insurance for their employees. In addition, cities must cope with unfunded mandates imposed on 24
them by the Legislature such as the requirement to pool early retirees with active employees and 25
the requirement to bargain over changes in the “aggregate value” of benefits, even when the 26
city’s contribution has not changed. 27
181
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports legislative efforts to control health 1
insurance costs while maintaining quality health care services. However, cities have 2
differing local needs and circumstances and must retain the flexibility to provide unique 3
and creative solutions to the rising costs of health care insurance for their employees. The 4
League: 5
a) Opposes legislative action that undermines local flexibility to manage rising health care 6
costs. 7
b) Encourages the Legislature to carefully examine the costs and administrative impacts of 8
any new, mandated insurance-related benefit before imposing it upon city employers. 9
c) Supports changes to Minn. Stat. § 471.6161, subd. 5, that would clarify the intent of the 10
subdivision is to address changes in cost vs. changes in value (e.g., changes in provider 11
networks, changes in benefit levels required by an incumbent insurance carrier, 12
changes required for compliance with state and federal laws, including those needed to 13
avoid incurring the federal excise tax known as the “Cadillac Tax”). 14
d) Supports changes to Minn. Stat. § 471.61 so that the requirement for cities to offer 15
retiree coverage begins on the date the retiree and/or dependents become eligible for 16
federal Medicare coverage. 17
e) Supports a clarification to Minn. Stat § 471.61 and to Minn. Stat. § 471.617 to explicitly 18
alleviate a city’s responsibility to comply with group health benefits mandated by state 19
law when the city’s employees are covered under a union plan authorized by federal 20
statutes. 21
f) Supports statutory authorization for cities to collect up to a two percent administrative 22
fee from retirees receiving post-retirement health insurance benefits. 23
g) Opposes any mandatory, centralized, statewide health insurance option for active or 24
retired city employees. 25
h) Supports changing Minn. Stat. § 62A.21 to place reasonable limits on health care 26
continuation for former spouses, similar to the Federal COBRA law. 27
182
HR-13. Workers’ Compensation* 1
Issue: Rising medical costs are an increasingly serious problem for all employers and insurers, 2
and now represent over half of all loss costs within the workers’ compensation system. Medical 3
costs will be a major driver of future workers’ compensation premium increases. In addition, the 4
2013 legislature added post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a compensable injury and in 5
2014, a Minnesota Supreme Court decision found that provisions in the Workers’ Compensation 6
statute which allow workers compensation benefits for permanent and total disabilities to be 7
offset by disability benefits and pension benefits such as Social Security does not apply to 8
retirement benefits of the Public Employees Retirement Association. In 2018, the Legislature 9
modified Minn. Stat. § 176.011, subd. 15, which defines an occupational disease to add a 10
rebuttable presumption to a diagnosis of PTSD in certain public safety and related personnel. In 11
2020, the legislature initially modified Minn. Stat. § 176.011, subd. 15 to temporarily add a 12
diagnosis of COVID-19 for peace officers, firefighters, paramedics and other defined employee 13
classes as a presumed occupational disease covered by the workers’ compensation system and 14
this presumption has beenwas extended through January 13, 2023. The Minnesota Legislature 15
also regularly considered proposals to expand the heart, lung and infectious disease presumptions 16
for public safety workers, and to make the presumptions more conclusive and difficult to rebut. 17
These types of benefit expansions would further increase municipal workers’ compensation 18
costs. 19
Response: Legislative action is necessary to address increasing workers’ compensation 20
costs, particularly rising medical costs. The League of Minnesota Cities supports: 21
a) Use of the Workers Compensation Advisory Council (WCAC) system to consider 22
proposals for changes to the workers’ compensation law and urges the WCAC and the 23
Legislature to approve medical cost containment reforms. 24
b) Filling an existing WCAC employer vacancy with a public-sector employer 25
representative or adding a designated public-sector employer representative to the 26
WCAC. 27
183
c) Continuing the WCRA as the mandatory workers’ compensation reinsurer for insurers 1
and self-insurers in Minnesota and supports modifying state statutes to treat PTSD 2
events involving several affected parties as one occurrence for retention purposes, 3
thereby reducing the exposure of self-insured entities and the statewide insurance pools. 4
Such a change would not have any effect on the benefit an individual employee would 5
receive. 6
d) Legislation that would disallow the “stacking” of PERA retirement benefits and 7
Workers Compensation benefits due to the fact that some injured employees could 8
receive total compensation from workers’ compensation and PERA retirement benefits 9
that would be well above the salary that they had been earning and the fact that the 10
costs would ultimately be passed on to cities and their taxpayers. 11
e) Extending the time limit on denials of liability for PTSD injuries from the current 14 12
days in order to allow diagnosis in accordance with the requirements contained in the 13
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) which guides the 14
diagnosis of PTSD under Minnesota Law (Minn. Stat. § 176.011, subd. 15). 15
f) Policies that provide opportunities for employees diagnosed with PTSD to receive 16
treatment for PTSD that could result in continued employment with the local 17
government. 18
g)f)State funding to assist with the potential extraordinary costs of the COVID-19 workers’ 19
compensation occupational disease presumption enacted in Session Laws 2020, Regular 20
Session Chapter 72, extended to December 31, 2021 in Session Laws 2021, Chapter 12 21
and re-enacted from February 3, 2022 through January 13, 2023 in Session Laws 2022, 22
Chapter 32. 23
The League opposes expansion of workers’ compensation and related health insurance 24
benefits because of the potential for dramatically increasing costs to cities. Specifically, the 25
League opposes expansion of the heart, lung and infectious disease and PTSD 26
presumptions, the creation of new occupational disease presumptions as well as any 27
expansion of the law that would require payment of health insurance premiums. 28
184
HR-14. Public Safety Duty Disability* 1
Issue: The League of Minnesota Cities and the communities it serves recognize the inherent 2
dangers faced by peace officers and firefighters in the line of duty. The duties performed by 3
public safety employees sometimes lead to physical and mental injuries. 4
In recent years, the number of public safety employees seeking duty disability determinations 5
through the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) and making workers’ 6
compensation claims for line-of-duty injuries has accelerated. This is particularly true in the 7
wake of a 2019 legislative change that made post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) a 8
presumptive condition for workers’ compensation purposes. The League is concerned about 9
these trends for the following reasons: 10
a) Every injury that leads to a PERA duty disability retirement and/or workers’ compensation 11
claim impacts the employee, the employee’s family and the employee’s organization. 12
b) The current system for processing and addressing duty disability benefits can be 13
incompatible with the goal of restoring good health and returning employees to work. 14
c) The fiscal impact of the increasing number of claims is unsustainable for employers and, 15
ultimately, taxpayers. 16
d) Public safety agencies, particularly those that are very small and already experiencing 17
recruitment and retention challenges, will not remain viable if they continue to sustain 18
significant personnel losses. 19
Given these concerns, in 2023 the League and cities across Minnesota and other stakeholders 20
helped secure passage of legislation that establishes mental injury prevention and treatment 21
measures and provides $104M to pay for related costs. The bill also provides full reimbursement 22
to employers for the continued health insurance requirement for disabled employees. The 23
funding for the legislation is one-time, and ongoing funding will be needed to successfully 24
address ongoing duty disability challenges. 25
185
Additionally, the League and cities across Minnesota have invested resources into mental and 1
physical injury education, prevention and treatment. The League has also consulted with experts, 2
including those experienced with treating combat veterans, who report that with successful 3
treatment, many injured public safety employees can achieve optimal outcomes of restoring good 4
health for themselves, their families and returning to work. The League is actively working with 5
cities and other stakeholders, including public safety labor representatives, to advance the 6
following: 7
a) Normalizing conversations about mental health within local government organizations and 8
their public safety departments; 9
b) Promoting statewide peer support best practices and training programs; 10
c) Identifying ways to promote cultural behaviors that enhance public safety physical and 11
mental wellness; 12
d) Educating stakeholders (employers, employees and state and local leaders) about PTSD 13
signs, symptoms, treatment options and outcomes; 14
e) Gathering empirical evidence related to treatability of mental injuries; 15
f) Develop human resources guidance that focus on: 16
1) Enhancing relationships between public safety and human resources managers to 17
coordinate and streamline prevention of, and response to, duty disability injuries; 18
2) Implementing best practices and initiatives aimed at improving mental health wellness 19
and preventing and coping with PTSD; 20
3) Providing early intervention/resources for public safety employees who experience work-21
related trauma; and 22
4) Providing paid time off or light duty for public safety employees who experience work-23
related trauma; 24
186
g) Identifying resources (partnerships) to help temporarily backfill positions so employees may 1
take needed time off without losing their jobs or causing hardship for employers/agencies; 2
and 3
h) Developing best practices for return-to-duty following a mental injury. 4
Response: In order to achieve optimal outcomes, additional statewide policies and resources 5
are necessaryfor the 2023 duty disability law to be effective, ongoing state funding is 6
necessary. The League of Minnesota Cities supports ongoing full state funding for: 7
a) Legislative changes that will help ensure appropriate diagnosis and treatment for 8
employees with mental injuries; 9
b)a) Full state funding for tThe Public Safety Officer Benefit Account that reimburses 10
employers for providing continued health insurance to police officers and firefighters 11
injured in the line of duty and dependents of those killed (Minn. Stat. § 299A.465); 12
c)b) Funding to rReimbursemenst to local governments for providing paid time off to 13
public safety employees who experience work-related trauma and/or are seeking 14
treatment for a mental injury; 15
d)c) Funding for iInitiatives and programs that provide peer support, emotional trauma 16
training, early intervention and mental health treatment; and 17
e) Requiring public safety college programs to include mental health and specifically 18
PTSD education as part of their curriculum, focusing on prevention and coping; 19
f)d) Funding for eEmotional trauma training for pre-service and in-service public safety 20
officers; and. 21
g) Advancing wellness for public safety employees as a component of law enforcement 22
reform. 23
187
HR-15. Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace* 1
Issue: Employer testing of job applicants is governed by Minn. Stat. § 181.950 – 181.957 and is 2
known as the Drug and Alcohol Testing in the Workplace Act (DATWA). It applies to all 3
employers with one or more employees, including cities. The DATWA has not been amended for 4
many years to reflect various and significant changes in drug-testing technology nor policy 5
changes at the federal level. 6
The DATWA prohibits an employer from terminating an employee for a positive controlled 7
substance test without first providing the employee a chance for rehabilitation and treatment. 8
This law applies to probationary employees as well as those who have completed probation. 9
Currently, breathalyzer use and saliva swabs are permitted for alcohol testing under federal 10
commercial driver testing laws though Minnesota does not allow for the use of breathalyzers in 11
testing. Use of breathalyzers for employee alcohol testing is a less invasive, less expensive 12
method. In addition, federal commercial driver testing laws address a number of outcomes other 13
than a positive test result, including but not limited to tampering with a sample, providing a 14
substitute sample, providing a sample that is not human urine, providing a sample that is not 15
capable of being tested, etc. State law is silent on these outcomes. 16
Finally, a new law enacted during the 2023 legislative session legalized adult-use cannabis in 17
Minnesota and updated laws related to drug and alcohol testing in the workplace. Currently, 18
testing for cannabis can show evidence of usage for up to 30 days prior to testing and there is no 19
test available to determine an employee’s current intoxication from cannabis. This creates 20
challenges for employers when investigating workplace incidents in which an employee is 21
suspected to be intoxicated by cannabis while working. 22
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the following changes to the DATWA: 23
a) Updates to reflect new issues, such as adding new definitions as needed to reflect 24
current practices; 25
188
b) Clarification that a positive controlled substance test during probation does not require 1
the employer to provide an employee who has not completed probation a chance for 2
rehabilitation and treatment; and 3
c) Permitting the use of breathalyzers and saliva swabs as acceptable technology for 4
determining alcohol use. 5
c)d) The legislature should continue to invest funds into research to develop technology 6
that can assist with determining cannabis intoxication in the workplace. 7
HR-16. Veterans Preference 8
Issue: Cities have a long history of recruiting and hiring veterans as they are a natural fit in city 9
government. Across the state, cities are partners in working with and ensuring veterans have a 10
variety of opportunities afforded to them given their sacrifice and service. The purpose of the 11
Minnesota Veteran’s Preference Act (VPA) is to facilitate the transition of veterans from the 12
military to civilian life and to help compensate veterans for their sacrifices of health and time to 13
the community, state and nation. The VPA grants veterans limited preference over nonveterans 14
in hiring and promotion for most state and local government employment to recognize the 15
training and experience they received as a result of serving in the military. It also provides local 16
government employees who are veterans some protection against unfair demotions and 17
dismissals. These preferences and protections are commonly referred to as “veteran’s 18
preference” and are codified in Minn. Stat. § 43A.11, 197.455, 197.46, 197.48, and 197.481. 19
Once a veteran has completed an initial probationary period upon hire, they cannot be removed 20
from their position or employment, except for incompetency or misconduct shown after a 21
properly noticed hearing. Currently, a veteran can only be placed on probation upon hire but not 22
following a promotion. It is common practice to place employees on probation following 23
employee promotion making this restriction inconsistent with current practice and procedure. 24
Termination hearings are held before the local civil service commission or before an arbitrator 25
and Minn. Stat. § 197.46 allows a veteran to choose a hearing before the local civil service 26
commission, or an arbitrator. Members of civil service commissions are chosen for their 27
189
expertise and experience with employment law. Hiring an arbitrator for a hearing instead of 1
utilizing an established civil service commission is inefficient. 2
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities recognizes the important contributions veterans 3
have made and supports giving veterans limited preference in employment. To strengthen 4
and improve the VPA, the legislature should: 5
a) Allow cities to place veterans on probationary periods upon promotion as they do with 6
other employees; and 7
b) Restore the language in Minn. Stat. § 197.46 requiring a hearing to be held before a 8
local civil service commission where one exists. 9
HR-17. Military Leave Reimbursement 10
Issue: Minn. Stat. § 192.26 subd. 1, requires local units of government to provide 15 days of 11
compensation per year to employees who are members of the military for military leave. State 12
laws give preference to hiring veterans for public sector jobs, and, citizen soldiers are a natural 13
fit to also serve as public safety personnel. As such, many public safety personnel are often also 14
members of the military and are required to conduct training and military duties throughout the 15
year. 16
In addition to providing compensation for mandatory military leave, cities must also ensure that 17
these temporary vacancies are adequately filled by public safety personnel whose training and 18
qualifications are unique to providing public safety. This can result in added overtime costs and 19
may impact public safety service levels. 20
Government employers honor and recognize the importance of ensuring members of the military 21
are able to fulfill their duties and participate in mandatory training, while also aiming to ensure 22
that public safety service in their community is efficient, seamless, and cost-effective. In 23
response to this issue, there have been recent legislative proposals to reimburse local units of 24
government for military leave paid to public safety personnel. 25
190
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports state funding to ensure that local units 1
of government can maintain quality and cost-effective public safety services in their 2
communities and for their taxpayers while also offering full support for employees who are 3
members of the military. Such state funding could include reimbursement of costs incurred 4
to local units of government related to compensating personnel on military leave as well as 5
reimbursement for costs related to ensuring these temporary vacancies are adequately 6
filled. 7
HR-18. Tele-Health Exams 8
Issue: Technology improvements are creating new ways to approach many city functions. 9
Specifically, the increased acceptance of the use of tele-health (audio and video, web-based) 10
exams creates an opportunity for cities to access and use psychologists with specific expertise in 11
public safety as part of the hiring process for police officers. However, the Peace Officers 12
Standards and Training (POST) Board has adopted a position prohibiting the use of tele-health 13
exams for the required psychological oral interview/evaluation prior to hiring. 14
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the use of tele-health (audio and video, 15
web-based) exams to meet the requirements of the POST Board for a psychological oral 16
interview/evaluation prior to hiring a police officer candidate. 17
HR-NEW A. Public Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire Plan 18
Membership Eligibility for Fire Department Employees* 19
Issue: According to Minn. Stat. § 353.63, “It is the recognized policy of the state that special 20
consideration should be given to employees of governmental subdivisions who devote their time 21
and skills to protecting the property and personal safety of others.” Since this work is hazardous, 22
special provisions are made for retirement pensions, disability benefits and survivors benefits 23
based on the particular dangers inherent in these occupations. The benefits provided in the Public 24
Employees Retirement Association Police and Fire (PERA-P&F) Plan are more costly than 25
similar benefits for other public employees since they are computed on the basis of a shorter 26
working lifetime taking into account experience which has been universally recognized. Further, 27
191
participation in the PERA-P&F Plan for fire department employees is a valued benefit for the 1
public service provided to residents. 2
For a member of a fire department to be eligible for membership in the PERA-P&F Plan, the 3
primary duties of a person’s position must include extinguishing fires. Inconsistent 4
interpretations of the word “primary” have been encountered by multiple cities and departments. 5
Firefighters and the fire chief position are eligible for PERA-P&F Plan membership due to Minn. 6
Stat. § 353.64 subd. 1 (2) which defines membership as “a full-time firefighter or a person in 7
charge of a designated fire company or companies who is engaged in the hazards of firefighting.” 8
The Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) has reviewed job descriptions for other 9
positions in a fire department including assistant fire marshal, fire marshal, assistant chief, and 10
deputy chief, and determined that none of these positions are eligible for membership in the 11
PERA-P&F Plan. PERA determined that although the fire marshal and assistant fire marshal may 12
have to report to a fire and do have some risks associated with entering a dwelling post-fire, they 13
are not eligible for membership in the PERA-P&F Plan based on the primary duties of the job 14
not being that of a firefighter (extinguishing fires). PERA also determined that the assistant chief 15
and deputy chief positions also do not have a regular duty to extinguish fires or work as a 16
firefighter. The current interpretation of the statute allowing for a single person in charge of the 17
fire department to be members of the PERA-P&F Plan only applies to the fire chief. 18
Recruitment into fire leadership roles, which may come from other jurisdictions, is an important 19
tool in a city’s workforce toolbox in order to provide public safety to residents. The statute does 20
allow that if a person is transferred/promoted from an eligible PERA-P&F Plan position, then the 21
city can file a transfer resolution to keep them in the PERA-P&F Plan. However, this only 22
applies to current employees in the same jurisdiction and limits the ability for departments to 23
competitively hire leadership positions from out of the state or from other jurisdictions. 24
In its current form and interpretation three issues negatively impact recruitment into fire 25
departments: 26
1. The primary duties of the executive chief officer positions of assistant chief and deputy 27
chief are command and control of fire companies at emergency scenes. Primary is understood to 28
mean the highest priority task and a job requirement that the employee respond on a regular basis 29
192
to the fire and other emergency calls that are received both during and after the employee’s 1
established work hours. 2
2. Fire marshal and assistant fire marshals conduct fire cause determination investigations 3
which take place inside buildings that have been structurally compromised by fire and are 4
exposed to the same carcinogens present and recognized as known hazards of firefighting. 5
Additionally, the fire marshal and assistant fire marshals respond to support fire ground 6
operations in support of the command structure. Responding to an emergency scene is the fire 7
marshal’s and the assistant fire marshal’s primary job requirement. Primary is understood to 8
mean the highest priority task and job requirement that the employee respond on a regular basis 9
to the fire or other emergency calls that are received both during and after an employee's 10
established work hours. 11
3. Fire departments currently have some employees serving in these leadership positions in 12
the PERA-P&F Plan and some who are not. The only difference is that some were once 13
firefighters and others were not. This difference in benefits for the same job classification makes 14
recruitment difficult, as these positions are open to internal and external candidates. Further, as 15
the response to emergency scenes including fires is their primary job responsibility, they need 16
the same benefits as others in the PERA-P&F Plan because a debilitating injury or illness would 17
mean that they would no longer be able to perform their primary responsibility and could not be 18
accommodated permanently causing loss of employment in the position. 19
Response: The legislature should clarify that positions such as fire marshal, assistant fire 20
marshal, assistant chief, and deputy chief are eligible for membership in the PERA-P&F 21
Plan regardless of whether the employee was hired from within the department or was 22
hired externally, if they routinely respond to fire emergencies to support firefighting efforts 23
and are exposed to the risks and hazards of fire scenes. 24
Data Practices 25
193
DP-1. Data Practices Compliance Costs 1
Issue: The purpose of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) is to protect 2
personal information from indiscriminate disclosure while balancing the right of the public to 3
know what the government is doing. The Act also attempts to balance these rights within a 4
context of effective government operation. The League of Minnesota Cities supports the public 5
policy behind the MGDPA while acknowledging that compliance with the law imposes costs on 6
local taxpayers. Smaller cities struggle with limited staff and resources while larger cities 7
struggle with larger complex databases. The MGDPA must balance the right of citizens to access 8
public data with the cost to municipalities of complying with certain types of data requests. 9
In 2014, the Legislature imposed additional security requirements on political subdivisions in an 10
attempt to prevent unauthorized individuals from accessing private data. Adequate security 11
measures are important, but they make compliance with the MGDPA more difficult and costly. 12
Although the Legislature has made compliance with the MGDPA a priority, funding for the Data 13
Practices Office of the Department of Administration, the department charged with overseeing 14
the MGDPA, does not reflect the increased need for local government assistance. 15
Cities continue to receive repetitive, overly broad and far-reaching data requests that require 16
significant staff time to locate government records, redact private data or data unrelated to the 17
request, and assemble documents to be provided in order to comply with requirements to provide 18
access to public government data. Cities are experiencing significant increases in wide-ranging 19
data requests, often utilizing specific word searches through multiple databases. “Word search” 20
requests typically result in a voluminous quantity of data that must be reviewed and redacted, 21
with significant staff cost. Because word searches retrieve even incidental references to the 22
searched term, the search results often contain a significant volume of data that has little 23
informational value. If the requestor does not request copies, the search costs cannot be 24
recovered – even though the requestor dictated the specifics of the search. 25
Furthermore, in some situations, as with overly broad data requests related to “applicant” lists, 26
staff time and costs are significantly increased and not recoverable for very limited public 27
benefit. The MGDPA also limits the ability of cities to be reimbursed for responding to requests. 28
194
Cities are limited to charging only 25-cents per page for copies of police motor vehicle incident 1
reports, which does not cover the city cost for copying, while the Commissioner of Public Safety 2
is exempt from this restriction—thereby permitting the Department of Public Safety to continue 3
to charge $5 for incident reports that cities are required to submit to the department. 4
Response: As the cost of complying with the MGDPA increases, the League supports: 5
a) Providing additional state funding to assist political subdivisions with meeting the 6
increasing complexity of managing government data. 7
b) Providing state funding for statewide data practices training. 8
c) Allowing political subdivisions to charge for the staff time that is required to comply 9
with wide-ranging data requests regardless of whether copies of the data are requested 10
or allowing political subdivisions to charge for actual costs for collection of data when 11
the requestor makes his or her own copy of the data by taking a photo, bringing a copy 12
device, etc. 13
d) Providing a mechanism that would permit cities to challenge whether a data request is 14
reasonable and made in good faith. 15
e) Creating and funding an ombudsperson position in the Data Practices Office to 16
determine reasonableness and proportionality of data practices requests. 17
f) Providing funding and authority to the Data Practices Office to engage in the 18
rulemaking process to establish standards and procedures related to requests and 19
responses to data practices requests that impose significant burdens on government 20
entities. 21
g) Amending the MGDPA to limit what is considered public applicant data to better 22
balance the value of public data with the cost related to data practices compliance. 23
h) Allowing political subdivisions to charge the same amount for copies of motor vehicle 24
incident reports issued by local police and fire departments as the commissioner of 25
public safety. 26
195
The League of Minnesota Cities opposes: 1
a) Further increasing the maximum exemplary damages that courts may impose against 2
government entities, including cities, found to have violated the MGDPA; further 3
increasing the maximum civil penalty that may be imposed when a court order is issued 4
to compel a government entity to comply with MGDPA; or any statutory change that 5
would make it a mandatory civil penalty to compel compliance under the MGDPA. 6
b) Repealing of the administrative remedies provisions adopted by the 2010 Legislature to 7
address disputes regarding MGDPA compliance issues. 8
DP-2. Records Retention Compliance Costs 9
Issue: The Official Records Act requires government entities to “make and preserve all records 10
necessary to a full and accurate knowledge of their official activities.” In accordance, cities must 11
establish a records retention schedule, and maintain and destroy official records according to this 12
schedule. There are rigorous requirements for any changes to a city’s records retention schedule, 13
including getting approval from the statutorily-created Records Disposition Panel, which strikes 14
an appropriate balance between the government entity’s decision-making role in determining 15
retention and disposition of official records with the public’s right to know the government 16
entity’s official activities. 17
Response: As the cost of complying with the records management laws increases, the 18
League supports providing additional state funding to assist political subdivisions with 19
meeting the increasing complexity of managing government records. 20
The League of Minnesota Cities opposes changing the current record management 21
requirements and statutory definitions. If changes are needed, subject matter experts 22
should make recommendations through the records retention schedule process. 23
DP-3. Updating the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act* 24
Issue: The Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) was first enacted in 1979. 25
AlmostOver 40 years later, times have changed dramatically. In particular, there has been 26
196
exponential change in technology. In 1979, cities were largely maintaining data in paper form, 1
computers had just become viable for home users, word processing had just become a reality, the 2
first point-and-shoot, autofocus camera came on the market, and the internet was still about a 3
decade on the horizon. 4
While the MGDPA was originally drafted to be future thinking by contemplating the various 5
forms data could be held – including the concept of storage media – the legislators of the time 6
could not have imagined where technology would be today. For example, the originally-drafted 7
MGDPA made reference to photostatic, microphotographic, or microfilmed records. Minn. Stat. 8
§ 13.03, subd. 1. The current law still refers to these same mediums of data, despite few cities 9
maintaining data in this manner. 10
Technology has exploded, and the type of data collected by this new technology has multiplied. 11
In our current reality, the public and government have been frustrated by how best to access 12
government data. In Webster v. Hennepin County, 910 N.W. 2d 420 (Minn. 2018), the County 13
was asked to conduct a computer-aided search of all its email accounts over multiple years for 20 14
separate search terms related to biometrics and facial recognition. The Minnesota Supreme Court 15
found that the County failed to establish procedures to ensure appropriate and prompt 16
compliance with data requests but did not find that the County failed to keep its records in an 17
arrangement and condition to make them easily accessible for convenient use. The Court also did 18
not address if a term search was a valid data practices request or if a request could be unduly 19
burdensome. The lack of direction from the Court on these issues leaves a void. 20
There are also other advances in technology that are not comprehensively addressed by the 21
MGDPA. While the Legislature has attempted to address technological advancements as they 22
come, it has been in piecemeal ways. 23
Response: The MGDPA should undergo a comprehensive review periodically to address 24
technological changes, and the Legislature should update the law to address those 25
changes.The Legislature should update the MGDPA to comprehensively address 26
technological changes since the Act was first enacted. Because the MGDPA is a complicated 27
area of law, the Legislature should make changes based on the recommendations from 28
subject matter experts from all levels of government and interested stakeholders, including 29
197
recommendations on what constitutes reasonable data practices request and when a data 1
practices request is unduly burdensome. 2
DP-4. Maintaining Government Data in Large Databases 3
Issue: The Minnesota Department of Administration Advisory Opinion 10-016 issued in June 4
2010 maintains that the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) requires cities to 5
keep records containing public government data so that they can be easily accessible and 6
convenient to use, regardless of how they are kept. Cities maintain that the application of this 7
advisory opinion to large databases in which records are kept in an electronic format forces cities 8
to risk the daily threat of allegations of noncompliance or leaves local government officials 9
confused regarding how to apply the requirement for access to data in circumstances where 10
information technology is utilized to facilitate the management and organization of records and 11
information which often includes public, private, and nonpublic data within individual data sets. 12
In addition, large databases today contain different forms of data, including video, audio, images, 13
and social media. In responding to data practices requests, responsive data could be stored in 14
multiple data bases. Further, with the advent of cloud-based information systems provided by the 15
private sector, newer databases are not typically designed to be controlled by cities to easily 16
separate public from non-public data. 17
Response: The state of current technology requires cities to maintain large databases that 18
are designed to provide secure data storage and maintenance. Those databases are already 19
burdensome and expensive for cities to maintain but are not available in a form in which 20
public and private data can be easily separated. Requiring cities to design such databases 21
to accommodate extensive data requests under MGDPA is both financially and 22
technologically challenging to achieve. 23
The Legislature should address the growing and costly impact on cities of providing access 24
to specific public data housed in large electronic databases. 25
198
DP-5. Sharing of Student Data with Local Law Enforcement in Emergencies* 1
Issue: Minn. Stat. § 13.32, subd. 3(l), defines education data as private data that must not be 2
disclosed except to the juvenile justice system in cases where information about the behavior of a 3
student who poses a risk of harm is reasonably necessary to protect the health or safety of the 4
student or other individuals. In addition, the federal Family Education Rights & Privacy Act 5
(FERPA) bars schools from disclosing information on student educational records that contains 6
personally identifiable information without consent of a parent or eligible student, with only 7
limited exceptions. 8
Minn. Stat. § 13.32 does not adequately define who is responsible for making the determination 9
that an emergency or risk of harm exists. As a result, school district officials have interpreted the 10
statute in conjunction with the restrictions in FERPA to require that the determination be made 11
solely by school officials. 12
Local police officials are often frustrated in their efforts to investigate allegations of criminal or 13
other illegal activity when school officials refuse, under Minn. Stat. § 13.32, subd. 3(l), and 14
FERPA, to provide information to follow up such complaints or to assist local police in solving 15
crimes that have already taken place. 16
School boards are responsible to have policies in place that require school officials to report a 17
student who possesses an unlawful firearm to law enforcement or the juvenile justice system. But 18
schools are not allowed to release the name of a student in dangerous weapon reports involving 19
use or possession of such weapons that are made to the Minnesota Department of Education. 20
Response: Minn. Stat. § 13.32 should be clarified to allow local law enforcement agencies to 21
work with school officials to jointly make the determination that an emergency or risk of 22
harm exists in order to enable police enforcement actions to be taken in a timely manner, 23
and to aid in the investigation of possible crimes. 24
DP-6. Disclosure of Victim Data 25
Issue: Under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA), the name and address of 26
a victim or casualty of an accident or incident to which a law enforcement agency responds is 27
199
public government data. In addition, the name and location of the health care facility to which 1
victims or casualties are taken is public government data. The MGDPA allows a victim or 2
witness to prevent the disclosure of public data unless the law enforcement agency determines 3
that revealing the identity will not threaten the victim or witness’s personal safety or property. 4
However, victims and their families can be traumatized by the events that caused their injuries, 5
even when their safety or property is not threatened. Publicly disclosing their identities and the 6
location where they are receiving medical care places a burden on families and victims who may 7
be questioned by reporters, solicited by lawyers, and contacted by other members of the 8
community. While there are legitimate public policy reasons to make this information public, 9
the MGDPA provides no discretion for city officials and law enforcement to temporarily 10
withhold victim data when releasing it is not in the best interest of the victims. This not only 11
makes the initial period of recovery more difficult for victims but erodes the trust between 12
victims and state and local government. 13
Response: The Legislature should amend Minn. Stat. § 13.82 to allow law enforcement 14
agencies to temporarily withhold the disclosure of data that identifies victims and casualties 15
and the medical facilities to which they are taken if the agency reasonably determines that 16
access to the data would cause emotional harm to the individual or otherwise impede the 17
individual’s recovery. The Legislature should also amend Minn. Stat. 13.82 to clearly and 18
permanently prohibit the disclosure of traffic accident victim identity, similar to the 19
protections for crime victims. 20
DP-7. Challenges to the Accuracy of Data 21
Issue: The Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (MGDPA) allows the subject of 22
government data to challenge the accuracy or completeness of data maintained by the 23
government entity. If the government entity denies the challenge, the Act allows the data subject 24
to appeal that determination through a contested case proceeding under the Administrative 25
Procedures Act (APA). 26
In the human resources context, a performance evaluation is a tool used to document and 27
evaluate employee job performance. Performance evaluations are not discipline; however, some 28
200
jurisdictions and some union contracts have appeal processes to challenge a performance 1
evaluation. Performance evaluations are normally conducted once a year. 2
The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that a public employee could use the MGDPA to 3
challenge the accuracy of certain information contained in the employee’s performance 4
evaluation. Schwanke v. Minn. Dept. of Admin., 851 N.W. 2d 591 (Minn. 2014). While the Court 5
held that “dissatisfaction with a subjective judgment or opinion cannot support a challenge under 6
the [MGDPA],” a data subject can still challenge data that supports the subjective judgment. 7
There is currently no limitation on when a performance evaluation challenge may be brought. 8
Often there is no retention period for the underlying data because it is rarely an official record. 9
Furthermore, the more time that passes, the less likely those with the knowledge of a given 10
performance evaluation may be still employed by the city. It is to everyone’s benefit to have the 11
challenge to accuracy of data conducted as soon as possible. 12
Under Schwanke, an invalid challenge to a subjective opinion can no longer be dismissed by the 13
Department of Administration; it can only be dismissed in a contested-case proceeding. In even a 14
frivolous challenge the data subject will have the right to submit evidence and call witnesses at 15
taxpayer expense. 16
This right of review is in addition to any union grievance process and can be exercised by an 17
employee before or after such a grievance is undertaken. This process can result in conflicting 18
decisions and has the potential to create a heavy burden on all levels of government and impose 19
significant costs on taxpayers. 20
Response: In light of the Schwanke decision, the Legislature should modify the data 21
challenge provision of Minn. Stat. § 13.04, subd. 4, to balance the rights of data subjects to 22
challenge the accuracy and completeness of data with the administrative and financial 23
burdens on local governments and taxpayers. 24
DP-8. Law Enforcement Technologies 25
Issue: To aid law enforcement in work, law enforcement agencies need the flexibility to 26
effectively use all available tools, including technology, in a manner that balances privacy 27
201
interests of citizens, transparency of their work, and costs related to these technologies. The 1
Legislature has balanced these concerns in the recent License Plate Readers law and the Police-2
Worn Body Camera law. 3
License Plate Readers (LPRs) are an important tool that assist law enforcement agencies in 4
locating wanted individuals, recover stolen vehicles, and many other types of investigations. 5
Nevertheless, the use of this technology raises legitimate privacy concerns. In 2015, the 6
Legislature passed compromise legislation regulating the use of LPRs, the classification of LPR 7
data, and the retention period for LPR data that struck a fair balance between the need for robust 8
law enforcement and individual privacy rights. 9
Police-worn body cameras (or portable recording systems) provide invaluable evidence when 10
investigating crimes and prosecuting criminals and strengthened trust of citizens in law 11
enforcement by increasing the accountability between peace officers and the public. Different 12
than other kinds of data, body camera data use involves the unique complexities of the sensitive 13
nature in its use in private homes as well as the sheer volume of data in daily use. In 2016, the 14
Legislature contemplated all of these issues and passed compromise legislation regulating use of 15
body cameras, classification of body camera data, retention period for body camera data, release 16
of body camera data, audit requirements, and written policy requirements. 17
The Legislature has recently engaged in conversation about other types of law enforcement 18
technology, such as drones, facial recognition, etc. 19
Response: Cities and/or law enforcement agencies should be allowed to decide whether to 20
utilize technology and be given the flexibility to decide how they are used in the field. 21
a) The League supports the continued use of License Plate Readers under the terms of the 22
2015 legislation and opposes any further restrictions on their use or any reduction in 23
the current 60-day retention period. 24
b) With emerging law enforcement technologies, the League supports a balanced 25
approach to the values of privacy for citizens, transparency of the work of law 26
enforcement, and discretion to determine what technologies will be used, such as 27
202
effective use of these technologies, functional accuracy, emerging law enforcement 1
needs, communities served, and costs and benefits of technology. 2
DP-9. Body-Worn Cameras 3
Issue: Police-worn body cameras (or portable recording systems) provide invaluable evidence 4
when investigating crimes and prosecuting criminals and strengthen trust of citizens in law 5
enforcement by increasing the accountability between peace officers and the public. Different 6
than other kinds of data, body-camera data use involves the unique complexities of the sensitive 7
nature in its use in private homes as well as the sheer volume of data in daily use. In 2016, the 8
Legislature contemplated all of these issues and passed compromise legislation regulating use of 9
body cameras, classification of body camera data, retention period for body camera data, release 10
of body camera data, audit requirements, and written policy requirements. 11
In July 2021, the Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association found that more than 100 municipal 12
police departments in Minnesota use body-worn camera technology. The use has nearly doubled 13
in the last five years, and more police departments are considering deploying body-worn cameras 14
in the near future. 15
The longer body-camera technology is used in Minnesota, the more nuanced questions have 16
become. For example, the Legislature recently has engaged in more discussion about how law 17
enforcement uses body-camera technology, when the data should be released, etc. Cities have 18
found redaction for private data and non-public data to be more extensive than anticipated, 19
particularly as data practices requests for body-camera data have grown larger in scope and 20
breadth and the number of first responders, such as city and county firefighters, paramedics, and 21
mental health professionals, responding to calls has increased as well. 22
Response: The League supports the continued use of police-worn body cameras under the 23
terms of the 2016 legislation. However, if the Legislature makes changes to the body-worn 24
camera law, the League encourages the Legislature to update the law by adequately 25
balancing the competing values of transparency of police work, privacy interests of data 26
subjects, and integrity of police investigations. 27
203
DP-10. Open Meeting Law 1
Issue: The purpose of the Open Meeting Law generally requires that all meetings of public 2
bodies must be open to the public. This presumption of openness serves three vital purposes: to 3
prohibit actions from being taken at secret meetings, to assure the public’s right to be fully 4
informed, and to afford the public an opportunity to present views to the public body. 5
Technology has outpaced the Open Meeting Law. Recent city response to COVID-19 has 6
illustrated that remote participation for meetings can allow for meaningful interaction with the 7
city and the public. While the legislature recently changed the law to allow for greater 8
participation by interactive technology when a state of emergency has been declared, this change 9
was for a limited amount of time. Cities are in need of greater flexibility now to utilize 10
technology for meetings to protect the health of elected officials, city staff, and the public. Cities 11
also need to keep pace with the virtual world by having discretion to use remote technology in 12
the future. 13
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities encourages the Legislature to authorize cities 14
greater flexibility to allow remote participation under the Open Meeting Law, while 15
addressing the public’s needs to be fully informed of city decision-making and to have the 16
opportunity to present views to the public body. 17
The League opposes any change to the Open Meeting Law that would expand the award of 18
attorney’s fees to unintentional violations. 19
DP-11. Needed Closed Meeting Exceptions to the Open Meeting Law 20
Issue: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the Open Meeting Law and recognizes the 21
important role it plays in maintaining the public trust and the accountability of elected officials. 22
The Open Meeting Law must, however, balance the need for public information and the need to 23
protect privacy rights and certain negotiation strategies to protect the use of public resources. 24
Currently, there are seven exceptions to the open meeting laws that authorize the closure of 25
meeting to the public. Under these exceptions, some meetings may be closed at the discretion of 26
the governing body and some must be closed. Two challenges exist with current law. 27
204
The first concern is the hiring process for management level positions. While existing law allows 1
a governing body to close a meeting to evaluate the performance of an individual subject to its 2
authority, the statute doesn’t grant the same level of privacy for the city council and prospective 3
applicants. The statute should allow a governing body to close a meeting to interview applicants 4
for employment if there is a quorum present; and, to allow a governing body to close a meeting 5
to discuss the terms of an employment agreement to offer to a candidate to whom a job offer has 6
been extended. This would be consistent with the existing authority for the governing body to 7
close a meeting to discuss labor negotiations strategy. Allowing a closed meeting so that a 8
council can discuss the results of an interview process for a management-level position will 9
allow council members to express opinions or ask questions they may have concerns about 10
discussing in a public meeting and preserves the integrity of the interview process of subsequent 11
candidates. 12
The second concern with existing law is the inability for public bodies to conduct strategic 13
negotiations. Current law allows the public body to close a meeting to discuss the purchase or 14
sale of property and labor negotiations but does not allow the public body to close a meeting to 15
discuss negotiation strategies for an agreement with private parties, non-profit organizations, 16
and/or public entities. The ability for public bodies to close meetings in these situations provides 17
public bodies the opportunity to form strategies in the best financial interest of the community, 18
which is consistent with the importance of negotiation regarding purchase or sale of property and 19
labor contracts. Further, the City may create documents outlining the negotiation strategy, which 20
should be protected for the same reasons as for closing the meeting. Such data should be 21
protected during negotiations of the contract until a contract for the goods or services is signed or 22
abandoned, which is similar to the protection allowed for request for proposals under Minn. Stat. 23
§ 13.591. 24
Response: The Legislature should amend the Open Meeting Law: 25
a) To allow a governing body or a committee created by a governing body to close a 26
meeting to interview candidates for management-level positions such as city manager, 27
administrator, clerk-treasurer, city attorney, superintendent, or department head, and 28
205
to close a meeting to evaluate and discuss the candidates, and discuss salary and benefit 1
negotiations. 2
b) To allow a governing body to close a meeting to discuss negotiation strategies for 3
proposed contracts and/or agreements with private parties, non-profit organizations, 4
and/or public entities and keep that data private or nonpublic until the contract is 5
signed by the governing body or a decision is made to abandon a contract for those 6
goods or services. 7
Such closed meetings should follow the same or similar procedures for conducting closed 8
meetings currently required under the Open Meeting Law. 9
DP-12. Remote Participation under the Open Meeting Law* 10
Issue: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the Open Meeting Law and recognizes the 11
important role it plays in maintaining the public trust and the accountability of elected officials. 12
The Open Meeting Law must, however, balance the need for public information and the need to 13
effectively run meetings. City councilmembers, along with advisory board and commission 14
members, from time to time want to remotely participate in meetings as may be needed. While 15
cities want these members to participate in city business to their fullest extent, it is also important 16
to protect the public’s right to see how government works. Currently under the interactive 17
technology exception to the Open Meeting Law in Minn. Stat. § 13D.02, subd. 1, members of 18
public bodies can remotely participate in meetings if they meet certain requirements: (1) all 19
members, wherever their physical location, can hear and see one another and can hear and see all 20
discussion and testimony presented; (2) members of the public present at the regular meeting 21
location of the body can hear and see all discussion and testimony and all votes of the members 22
of the body; (3) at least one member of the public body is physically present at the regular 23
meeting location; and (4) each location at which a member is present is open and accessible to 24
the public. The current law allows an exemption from this last requirement if a member (1) is in 25
the military and deployed andor (2) has been advised by a health care professional medically 26
advised not to be in a public place for personal or family medical reasons when a state of 27
emergency has been declared. The military and medical exceptions may only be used three times 28
per year. 29
206
On occasion, members of public bodies want to remotely attend meetings, but when members 1
have made their remote location “open and accessible,” no city resident shows up at the remote 2
location. COVID-19 has taught us that remote participation can allow for meaningful remote 3
participation and public interaction. However, members of public bodies may want to fulfill their 4
responsibility while traveling for work or personal reasonsdespite medical reasons outside of a 5
state of emergency, travel due to work, or personal travel. Removing the requirement for remote 6
locations to be “open and accessible to the public” still preserves the public’s ability to hear and 7
see all discussion, testimony, and voting by all participating members while allowing willing 8
members to participate in city business. 9
Response: The Legislature should amend the Open Meeting Law to allow city 10
councilmembers and city board/commission members to participate in meetings without 11
making their remote location open and accessible to the public as otherwise required under 12
Minn. Stat. § 13D.02, subd. 1. In light of the other safeguards in state law to ensure 13
transparency,While the Legislature should also amended the Open Meeting Law to allow 14
the medical exception to be used without the declaration of a state of emergency, and the 15
Legislature should remove the three-times-per-year cap for the medical and military 16
exceptions. 17
Federal Employment Law 18
FED-1. Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) 19
Issue: The federal Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) law, which 20
requires employers to offer continued health and dental insurance group benefits after an 21
employee terminates, has been interpreted to apply to Employee Assistance Programs (EAPs) 22
which provide any form of medical care, including short term counseling for drug and alcohol 23
addiction. The application of COBRA to these programs results in unlikely and impractical 24
outcomes and reduces the likelihood that employers will make them available. Final regulations 25
issued in 2014 exempt EAPs that do not provide “significant benefits in the nature of medical 26
207
care,” including EAPs that provide short term drug and alcohol counseling, from requirements of 1
the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). 2
Response: Congress should clarify that EAPs which do not provide significant benefits in 3
the nature of medical care are not subject to COBRA. 4
FED-2. Flexible Spending Accounts* 5
Issue: Health care costs are rising dramatically and employees need financial relief. Flexible 6
spending accounts provide some relief, but the current “use it or lose it” provision for medical 7
spending discourages employees from participating in this program. Though the IRS permits 8
carryovers of up to $500, employers that offer this option may not offer the 2 ½ month grace 9
period after the end of the plan year to incur eligible expenses. The Consolidated Appropriations 10
Act (CAA) providesd temporary relief, allowing employers to permit employees to carry over all 11
or some of their unused health and/or dependent care FSA funds from a plan year ending in 2020 12
or 2021. 13
In addition, the $5,000 annual maximum limit on dependent care accounts has not increased 14
substantially since the program’s inception in 1986 and childcare costs continue to rise 15
significantly. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP) providesd temporary relief, 16
increasing the annual maximum limit for dependent care to $10,500 for taxable years beginning 17
after December 31, 2020, and before January 1, 2022. 18
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports legislation that would make permanent 19
the changes in the CAA to allow employees to roll all unused funds in a health or 20
dependent care flexible spending account into the next plan year, or to allow unused funds 21
to be contributed into a tax-qualified retirement plan, or a 457 plan. The League of 22
Minnesota Cities also supports making permanent the $10,500 maximum limit for 23
dependent care accounts, with a cost-of-living inflationary increase each year after the 24
initial adjustment. 25
208
FED-3. IRS Regulations on Death Benefits 1
Issue: Current IRS regulations do not allow any type of death benefit to be included in a health 2
reimbursement arrangement (HRA) or tax-free, account-based group health plans. If a participant 3
of the HRA or account-based group health plan dies, they cannot leave the remaining funds to a 4
designated beneficiary unless the beneficiary is a spouse or dependent child who remains 5
enrolled in the HRA. Public sector HRAs are often treated as fully vested even when unfunded. 6
If the employee does not have a spouse or dependent child, the funds revert to the employer (who 7
may then credit the balance among plan participants). A death benefit provision is an attractive 8
feature for many employee groups. In 2008, Section 105 of the Internal Revenue Code was 9
amended, with a further amendment in 2015, to include limited exceptions to this general rule 10
but not all city plans meet the requirements of these limited exceptions. 11
Response: Congress should amend Section 105 of the Internal Revenue Code to allow all 12
HRAs and account-based health plans for both active employees and retirees to include a 13
provision that allows the employee to designate beneficiaries other than spouses and 14
dependents. Such beneficiaries should be able to, at a minimum, receive reimbursement for 15
their medical expenses from the inherited account. 16
FED-4. Federal Public Safety Collective Bargaining Bill 17
Issue: Congress is considering a bill that would require all states to establish collective 18
bargaining procedures for all public safety employees. The bill directs the Federal Labor 19
Relations Authority (FLRA) to determine, state by state, whether it meets the bill’s requirements 20
with regard to collective bargaining rights for public sector employees. While it appears 21
Minnesota is likely to pass the tests set out by the bill, federal public sector lobbyists have 22
expressed serious concern that the bill is very much open to interpretation. In addition, the bill 23
directs the FLRA to “consider and give weight, to the maximum extent practicable, to the 24
opinion of affected employee organizations.” 25
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities opposes the federal collective bargaining bill for 26
public sector employees. Public sector collective bargaining should be left to the 27
determination of each state. 28
209
FED-5. Federal Health Care Reform* 1
Issue: Certain provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (commonly referred 2
to as the federal health care reform law or Affordable Care Act (ACA)) are problematic for 3
cities. These issues range from administratively difficult to very costly. Tracking employee 4
hours, particularly hours of seasonal and temporary employees and council members, is 5
burdensome and will requires significant administrative time and effort. Because most of these 6
employees will not qualify for coverage under the ACA, the effort does not result in a 7
worthwhile outcome. There are also situations where employees who are currently working more 8
than 30 hours per week in a city will now be eligible for health care coverage by that city, which 9
will drive up city costs significantly, particularly for cities using the “duty crew” concept at fire 10
stations to ensure adequate daytime response. Finally, there are provisions which require the city 11
to offer coverage to full-time students who are already covered by their parents’ insurance and 12
do not need the coverage through the city, which results in wasted effort. 13
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the intent of the ACA to provide 14
affordable health care coverage to all Minnesota residents. However, Congress should: 15
a) Exempt (from the offer of coverage requirements) employees under age 26 who are 16
covered by their parents’ insurance; 17
b) Exempt (from the offer of coverage requirements) employees who work in recreational 18
facilities and programs owned and operated by governmental entities; and 19
c) Exempt elected officials from being counted as “employees” for the purposes of the 20
ACA. 21
FED-6. Amended Internal Revenue Code Regarding 403(b) Retirement Plans 22
Issue: Section 403(b)(1)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code allows an employer that is a State, 23
a political subdivision of a State, or an agency or instrumentality of a State or a political 24
subdivision of a State to establish a 403(b) retirement plan for employees who perform services 25
for educational organizations as described in Section 170(b)(1)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue 26
Code. This provision of the Internal Revenue Code allows employees to defer substantially more 27
210
income for retirement savings than their city government employee counterparts. While 1
government employees who do not perform services for an educational organization may 2
participant in a 457(b) deferred compensation plan, they may not participate in a 403(b) 3
retirement plan. Government employees who perform services for an educational organization 4
are able to participate in both a 403(b) plan and a 457(b) deferred compensation 5
plan. Furthermore, as a result of the amendment to Section 457(c) of the Internal Revenue Code 6
by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, deferrals to a 457(b) plan 7
are not coordinated with elective deferrals made to a 403(b) plan for purposes of complying with 8
the limit on pre-tax contributions to either plan. Both employee groups serve the public and 9
should be treated similarly under the Internal Revenue Code for purposes of tax-deferred 10
retirement savings plans.” 11
Response: Congress should amend Section 403(b)(1)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code to 12
allow an employer that is a State, a political subdivision of a State, or an agency or 13
instrumentality of a State or political subdivision to establish a 403(b) plan for all of its 14
employees, regardless of whether they perform services for an educational organization. 15
FED-7. Amended Internal Revenue Code Regarding Health Savings Account 16
Eligibility and Medicare Enrollment 17
Issue: Section 223(b)(7) of the Internal Revenue Code provides that the monthly limitation on 18
contributions to a health savings account (HSA) is zero starting with the first month in which an 19
individual is entitled to Medicare benefits. A person becomes entitled to Medicare benefits when 20
their Medicare coverage becomes effective. In many cases, Medicare coverage is effective on a 21
retroactive basis. Specifically, when an individual is required to submit an application for 22
Medicare coverage, the Medicare coverage will be effective retroactively up to six months before 23
the month in which the application is filed (depending on the date on which the individual first 24
become eligible for Medicare coverage) as described in 42 CFR §406.6(d). The IRS has 25
indicated that the monthly limitation on HSA contributions included in Section 223(b)(7) applies 26
during any retroactive period of Medicare coverage. This rule is confusing to employees, 27
employers, and benefit administrators and may lead to unintended and unexpected tax 28
consequences for employees and employers who may not be aware at the time an HSA 29
211
contribution is made that the monthly limitation for that month will be zero if the employee 1
applies for Medicare within the following six months and the coverage is effective retroactively 2
under this rule. Furthermore, if an employer provides contributions to an HSA as part of its 3
benefit package, then the rule may limit the benefits an active employee can receive from their 4
employer. 5
Response: Congress should amend Section 223(b)(7) of the Internal Revenue Code to 6
provide that the limitation on contributions to a health savings account for any month with 7
respect to any individual shall be zero for each month beginning with the later of (i) the 8
first month in which such individual is entitled to benefits under title XVIII of the Social 9
Security Act or (ii) the month in which such individual submits a valid application for 10
benefits under title XVIII of the Social Security Act. 11
NEW FED A. Affordable Care Act Reporting* 12
Issue: Almost all Minnesota cities that are Applicable Large Employers use the federal poverty 13
line safe harbor and can state on Line 23 of Form 1095-C that they meet the Qualifying Offer 14
Method and/or the 98% Offer Method. But they are still required to complete the entirety of 15
Form 1095-C, and in particular, the complex and time-consuming code combinations in Lines 14 16
and 16. The complexity of the form also increases the likelihood of error. In December of 2021, 17
the IRS announced that the “good faith” defense for errors in Forms 1094 and 1095 will no 18
longer be permitted, because they “have now been in place for six years, and transitional relief is 19
no longer appropriate.” This rationale does not reflect the reality of turnover in the workforce 20
and the often limited resources available to public employers for legal and tax professionals. In 21
2023, penalties that may be assessed against applicable large employers for good faith errors 22
made on Form 1005-C are $290 per return furnished to the employee and $290 for the same 23
return filed with the IRS, for a potential total of $580 per return. If a city meets the Qualifying 24
Offer Method or the 98% Offer Method, Form 1095-C gathers too much detail at too great a cost 25
to employers. In the public sector, the cost of this administrative burden, along with the potential 26
for penalties due to the complexity, is passed on to the communities they serve. 27
212
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the intent of the Affordable Care Act 1
(ACA) to provide affordable health care coverage to all Minnesota residents. But Congress 2
(or the IRS) should: 3
a) Allow applicable large employers in the public sector who meet the Qualifying Offer 4
Method or the 98% Offer Method to furnish and file Forms 1095-B rather than Forms 5
1095-C to all full-time employees and other current and former employees; 6
b) Deem employees who receive premium tax credits during months of non-coverage 7
reported on Form 1095-B to be not employed by the employer, in part-time status, or 8
fall within limited non-assessment periods (employers would still be subject to liability 9
for failures determined on audit); and 10
Reinstate relief from penalties relating to incorrect or incomplete filings for public 11
employers that make good faith errors in completing these forms.12
213
1
IMPROVING FISCAL FUTURES
FF-1. State-Local Fiscal Relations 1
Issue: Since the 1970s, services provided by Minnesota cities have been largely funded through 2
a combination of property taxes, state aids, and state property tax relief programs. This system of 3
municipal finance has evolved to ensure that municipal services can be funded without excessive 4
local tax burdens. 5
Over the past decade, the state-local partnership has vacillated with the state budget, challenging 6
the ability of city officials to plan for the future fiscal needs of their communities. 7
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports a strong state-local fiscal partnership. 8
The state-local fiscal system, and any future modifications, should be consistent with the 9
following principles: 10
Accountability. Cities believe a viable partnership with the state requires cities and the state 11
to communicate effectively with each other and with the public about their roles and 12
responsibilities. Cities and the state must also exercise sound financial stewardship, 13
including maximizing efficiencies in service delivery and other means of cost containment 14
whenever possible. 15
Certainty. Cities need to have more certainty and predictability in all of their available 16
revenue sources, including the property tax, the amount of funding they receive from local 17
government aid and similar programs and from other sources of revenue. The past practice 18
of retroactive adjustments to local government aid (LGA) and similar programs, 19
unallotments of the appropriation and the imposition of levy limits do not facilitate prudent 20
financial planning and decisions. In addition, during a past state government shutdown the 21
Department of Revenue indicated that despite the standing LGA appropriation, the 22
shutdown of many state government operations would prevent the distribution of the LGA. 23
214
Adequacy. The revenue sources available to cities and the state must raise adequate funds 1
to meet city needs, to fund mandates, and to maintain Minnesota’s long-term 2
competitiveness. 3
Flexibility. As cities become increasingly diverse in their characteristics and as existing aid 4
and credit programs have eroded, a “one-size-fits-all” system that limits all cities to the 5
property tax as the major, non-state aid revenue source is increasingly unworkable. Some 6
cities have sufficient property tax base to sustain an adequate service level, but many do 7
not. Cities should have greater access to other tax and revenue sources than currently 8
permitted. 9
Equity. All citizens should receive adequate levels of municipal services at relatively similar 10
levels of taxation. This means that the state should provide financial assistance to cities that 11
have high costs, including costs related to overburden created by non-resident users of city 12
services, low fiscal capacity, or both. State financial assistance should also reduce tax 13
burden disparities among communities and between cities and surrounding areas. 14
FF-2. State Budget Stability* 15
Issue: Legislative actions to address past state budget deficits have included permanent 16
reductions in funding to local units of government for programs such as local government aid as 17
well as the full elimination of programs such as the market value homestead credit. In addition, 18
the Legislature has frequently relied on short-term solutions that have only shifted a large share 19
of the deficit problem into the next biennium without permanently addressing the state budget 20
problems. 21
The legislature has taken steps to reduce state budget volatility. As required under Minn. Stat. § 22
16A.152, subd. 1, 33 percent of any state general fund budget surplus identified in the November 23
state budget forecast must be directed to the state budget reserve until the account reaches a 24
targeted level. 25
Response: To increase the stability of the state budget and avoid or reduce the impact of 26
future state budget deficits, the Legislature: 27
215
a) Must consider all budget stabilizing options, including revenue increases, with a 1
particular focus on changes that improve the stability of the state's revenue stream; 2
b) Must not further reduce funding for property tax relief programs to cities and 3
taxpayers; 4
c) Must not accelerate the remittance of sales tax collections by retailers including 5
municipal liquor operations, and should make steps to reverse past accelerations; 6
d) Must consider the aggregate impact on Minnesota taxpayers of previous budget cuts 7
and tax increases; 8
e) Must reinstate maintain detailed estimates of inflationary increases to expenditure 9
estimates in the state budget forecast; 10
f) Should maintain a budget reserve as recommended by Minnesota Management and 11
Budget based on their assessment of volatility in Minnesota’s revenue system defined in 12
Minn. Stat. §16A.152, subd. 8 with a minimum of a five percent reserve; 13
g) Should modify the unallotment statute to place a reasonable statutory limit on the 14
percentage and timing of the state’s budget that can be unallotted during a biennium 15
without legislative approval; and 16
h) Must emphasize long-term budget solutions and budget stability and the continuation 17
of both state and local government operations. 18
i) The League of Minnesota Cities supports the principle of representative democracy and 19
opposes limiting the Legislature’s flexibility in making financial decisions through new 20
Constitutional amendments. 21
FF-3. Funding Local Government Aid* 22
Issue: Local government aid (LGA) is an important component in the state’s property tax relief 23
system, and a critical tool to help equalize tax base to ensure needs for public services can be 24
met. To avoid undue pressure on the property tax, funding for LGA must keep pace with 25
216
inflationary pressures. The 2021 legislature added $5.5 million in one-time supplemental aid to 1
offset any LGA formula reductions for 96 cities with the expectation that the legislature would 2
update the formula during the 2022 session. The legislature did not approve a formula update and 3
the supplemental aid has now sunset. 4
For 2023, the total unmet formula need (the difference between each city’s formula-determined 5
need and ability to raise revenue) is $767.9 million, leaving the current formula appropriation 6
$203.5 million below the total unmet need. 7
In recent years, bills have been introduced that would have created offsets to a city’s LGA 8
distribution if the city imposed a local sales tax, spent funds for activities related to lobbying or a 9
World’s Fair, or would have reduced or eliminated LGA if the city enacted ordinances to ban 10
plastic bags, impose certain local labor laws, ordinances, or policies that restrict city employees 11
from enforcing immigration laws, unauthorized ordinances related to diversion programs. Such 12
changes would have been a significant deviation from the practice of using the formula to 13
distribute LGA and could have jeopardized the long-term stability of the program. 14
In 2023 the Legislature enacted changes to the Local Government Aid formula that were 15
recommended by the League of Minnesota Cities and other affiliate groups. These formula 16
changes were coupled with an $80 million increase in the appropriation. While the 2023 House 17
omnibus tax bill included tying the appropriation to inflation for future years, that proposal was 18
not included in the final bill. 19
For In 2023 2019 only, the Legislature included a one-time payment acceleration for payments 20
made in 2025 only that distributed 914.4026 percent of each city’s 2019 2025 LGA by June 21
15March 20, with a second payment of 3540.5984 percent on July 20 and a final payment of 50 22
percent on December 26. For 2020 2026 and beyond, LGA payments will again be made to cities 23
in two equal installments on July 20 and December 26 each year. 24
In 2022, the House omnibus tax bill would have dedicated a portion of future state budget 25
surpluses to phase-in an acceleration of the July 20 LGA distribution to March 15. The current 26
distribution occurs late in the city fiscal year and can create short-term cash flow challenges for 27
some cities. 28
217
Current law (Minn. Stat. § 477A.017, subd. 3) prohibits the distribution of LGA and Small Cities 1
Assistance Account funding (Minn. Stat. § 162.145) to cities that have not complied with all 2
financial reporting requirements to the Office of the State Auditor. Frequently, failure to comply 3
is due to factors outside the control of the city. Although many cities subsequently comply and 4
seek special legislation to receive the withheld LGA, the growing regularity of the legislature’s 5
failure to approve tax bills has jeopardized the restoration of these payments. 6
Response: In order to reduce pressure on the property tax, and to equalize property tax 7
bases, the League of Minnesota Cities continues to support the LGA formula as the 8
appropriate mechanism to distribute LGA resources. In addition, the League supports: 9
a) Regular review of the LGA formula and increases in the LGA appropriation and 10
review of the LGA formula 11
b) Updating the LGA formula, including the “need” formula factors, the appropriation 12
increase and other modifications consistent with the most recent recommendations of 13
the city association LGA working group established in 2021; 14
c)b) Restoring the annual inflation adjustment to the LGA program to move toward 15
funding the total unmet need of all cities. 16
d)c) Permanently accelerating of the annual LGA payment schedule to assist cities with 17
cash flow needs. 18
e)d) Establishing an administrative procedure that would allow cities that ultimately 19
comply with financial reporting requirements to receive their withheld aid 20
distributions. 21
The League opposes targeting reductions to specific cities or groups of cities as well as 22
reductions or offsets for local policy or expenditure decisions. 23
The legislature should avoid creating side-pots or special appropriations through the LGA 24
(Minn. Stat. ch. 477A) program. If special circumstances such as a natural disaster warrant 25
additional state assistance to specific cities, the criteria for the additional aid should be 26
218
specifically enumerated and the appropriation should be separate and in addition to the 1
appropriation through the general LGA formula. 2
FF-4. State Charges for Administrative Services 3
Issue: Currently, some state agencies have wide discretion in setting the fees for special services 4
they provide to local governments. 5
Response: State agencies should be required to justify their service fees or for increases in 6
existing service fees and not charge more than what is fair, reasonable, and proportionate 7
to the cost of service. Agencies should give adequate notice of increases to allow local 8
governments to budget for the increases. State agencies should set administrative service 9
fees as close as possible to the marginal cost of providing the service. Local government 10
should be given the option to self-administer or contract with the private sector for the 11
service if the state cannot provide the service at a reasonable cost. 12
FF-5. Reporting Requirements 13
Issue: Budget and financial reporting requirements imposed on cities by the state often result in 14
duplication and additional costs. In addition to the state mandated annual audits under Minn. 15
Stat. §§ 471.697-.698, cities are required to prepare and submit or publish numerous other budget 16
and financial reports including but not limited to: 17
a) Summary budget reports (Minn. Stat. § 6.745); 18
b) Summary budget information for the proposed budget, which is sent to the county for the 19
annual tax hearing process (Minn. Stat. § 275.065, subd. 3b); 20
c) Treasurers report to the city clerk (Minn. Stat. § 412.141); 21
d) Statement of tax collections and other income by clerk to the city council (Minn. Stat. § 22
471.69); 23
e) Report on outstanding obligations and the purpose for each issue filed with the county 24
auditor (Minn. Stat. § 471.70); 25
219
f) Publication of summary budget statement (Minn. Stat. § 471.6965); 1
g) Publication of statement of liquor store operations (Minn. Stat. § 477A.017); 2
h) Liquor store audited financial statements (Minn. Stat. § 471.6985); 3
i) TIF district plan and amendments (Minn. Stat. § 469.175, subd. 4a); 4
j) TIF district annual disclosure (Minn. Stat. § 469.175, subd. 5); 5
k) TIF district annual financial report (Minn. Stat. § 469.175, subd. 6); 6
l) Business subsidy reporting (Minn. Stat. §§ 116J.993-.995); 7
m) State required financial activity reports (Minn. Stat. § 6.74); 8
n) Local improvement requirements (Minn. Stat. § 429.031); 9
o) Development and permit fees report (Minn. Stat. § 326B.145); 10
p) Utility annual financial statements (Minn. Stat. § 412.381); 11
q) Housing and redevelopment authority annual financial report (Minn. Stat. § 469.013); and 12
r) Federal single audit or a program-specific audit (31 U.S.C. § 7502 (a)(1)). 13
s) A temporary reporting requirement for the federal American Recovery Plan Act distributions. 14
Many cities have expanded the availability of information on their web sites in response to 15
citizen requests and some cities have begun using new tools to assist citizens in understanding 16
the city budget. Expanding state mandated financial reporting requirements could force cities to 17
redirect scarce resources to the state mandate and stifle innovative ways to communicate with 18
citizens. 19
Response: Requirements for reporting and advertising financial and budget information 20
should be carefully weighed to balance the need for information with the administrative 21
costs of compiling and submitting this information. In addition, the legislature should 22
220
direct all state agencies to review existing local government reporting mandates and 1
eliminate redundant or superfluous requirements. To this point, the legislature should 2
consolidate municipal government financial reporting requirements in the Office of State 3
Auditor, include an electronic submission alternative to any remaining paper filing 4
requirements and authorize the use of web publication where newspaper publication is 5
currently required. 6
Finally, the legislature must not increase reporting burdens for local units of government. 7
Any new reporting requirement should have a clearly defined statement of purpose and 8
public need not currently met with existing reports, a sunset date to facilitate a future 9
discussion of the usefulness of the requirement as well as full state funding for the costs 10
associated with a new reporting mandate. 11
FF-6. Taxation Duplication 12
Issue: In Minnesota, local governments occasionally provide residents and businesses similar 13
types of services. For example, counties maintain a sheriff’s office while in many cities, police 14
services are provided by the city to their residents and businesses. When the county levy for the 15
sheriff’s operations is spread across the county, city residents and businesses are being taxed for 16
services that are not being provided within the city or are being provided at a lower level. 17
Similarly, in some areas, the county provides 9-1-1 dispatching services funded through the 18
property tax that is spread across the county but the county may also require cities to contribute 19
to the 9-1-1 operations through the city budget and property tax levy. As a result, city businesses 20
and residents are effectively paying twice for dispatch services—once through the county levy 21
and again through the city levy. 22
Response: Where similar services are provided by different levels of local government, 23
property tax levies for those services should only apply to those areas receiving the service. 24
Additionally, counties should be prohibited from requiring cities to contribute to services 25
that are being funded through the county-wide property tax levy. 26
221
FF-7. Direct Property Tax Relief Programs* 1
Issue: In 2013, the legislature expanded the homeowner property tax refund (PTR) program and 2
renamed it the Homestead Credit Refund program. As a direct taxpayer relief program, the 3
Homestead Credit Refund avoids the problems with the former Market Value Homestead Credit 4
system where the state provided a credit on the homeowner’s property tax statement but did not 5
always reimburse cities and counties for the amount of the credit. 6
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports providing additional, direct property 7
tax relief through an expansion of the Homestead Credit Refund program, the renters’ 8
refund program, the targeting program or other programs that provide property tax relief 9
directly from the state to taxpayers. In addition, the League supports the recent conversion 10
of the renters credit to an income tax credit using adjusted gross income rather than 11
household income for determining eligibility and would also support similar changes to the 12
homestead credit refund and targeting program to increase the accessibility of these 13
programs and remove administrative hurdles in claiming them. In addition, the League 14
supports the 2013 legislation that requires the Department of Revenue to notify potentially 15
eligible homeowners of the program and would also support legislative modifications to 16
these programs to eliminate the taxpayer filing requirement thereby making the tax relief 17
payments automatic. 18
The League opposes property tax credit programs that reimburse local units of 19
government for reduced tax burden such as the former market value homestead credit 20
system due to the fact that the reimbursements to local units of government can be cut 21
while the credit to the taxpayer remains on the property tax statement. In addition, the 22
League opposes reinstituting Limited Market Value, a program that reduces the taxable 23
value of individual properties based on assessor’s valuation increase or freezes in property 24
valuations. Limited Market Value or a valuation freeze create property tax shifts and tax 25
burden inequities between similar properties. 26
222
FF-8. Sales Tax on Local Government Purchases 1
Issue: The local government sales tax exemption enacted in 2013 and expanded in 2014 does not 2
apply to all city purchases. Some purchases for municipal enterprise operations, such as liquor 3
stores and golf courses are excluded from the exemption. In addition, in order to receive the sales 4
tax exemption on construction materials under current law, cities must bid labor and materials 5
separately and also designate a contractor to be a purchasing agent on behalf of the city. The 6
existing Department of Revenue rules (Minn. Rule 8130.1200, subp. 3) are complex and the 7
implementation can be so complicated that it can cost cities more money to implement than they 8
will save on the tax exemption. Finally, although cities currently do not pay the motor vehicle 9
sales tax on marked police vehicles or firefighting vehicles, other city vehicles are not exempt 10
from the motor vehicle sales tax. 11
The 2021 legislature extended the sales tax refund process under Minn. Stat. § 297A.71 and 12
Minn. Stat. § 297A.75 to contractor purchases of construction materials, supplies and equipment 13
incorporated into public safety buildings for initial construction, remodeling, expansion and 14
improvements for public safety facilities owned by local units of government. The refund 15
process also applies to materials used in related facilities such as access roads, lighting, 16
sidewalks and utility components. 17
Response: In order to ensure that taxpayers receive the full benefit of the local government 18
sales tax exemption: 19
a) The exemption should apply to all purchases made by local units of government; 20
b) The process to receive the exemption for construction materials used in local 21
government projects should be simplified or added to the refund process now available 22
for local government public safety facilities; and 23
c) The exemption should be extended to all local government purchases that would 24
otherwise be subject to the motor vehicle sales tax in Minn. Stat. ch. 297B. 25
223
FF-9. Taxation of Electronic Commerce 1
Issue: The 2018 U.S. Supreme Court decision [South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., 585 U.S. ___ 2
(2018)] overturned two earlier Supreme Court decisions [Quill Corp. v. North Dakota, 504 U.S. 3
298 (1992) and National Bellas Hess v. Department of Revenue, 386 U.S. 753 (1967)] that had 4
prevented states from requiring retailers without a physical presence from collecting state and 5
local sales taxes on purchases made by state residents and businesses. 6
A group of 23 states participating in the Streamlined Sales Tax Project have worked together for 7
more than 18 years to simplify the administration of state and local sales taxes and reduce the 8
administrative burden on retailers. The success of this project was referenced in the Wayfair 9
decision. 10
Despite the Supreme Court’s Wayfair decision, new legal challenges could be filed by remote 11
retailers or Congress could intervene to address remaining sales tax administration issues 12
including the fact that more than 20 states with sales taxes have not adopted the SSUTP 13
standards. 14
Response: Federal tax policy should not place main street businesses at a competitive 15
disadvantage to electronic retailers, must not jeopardize repayment of bonds backed by 16
state and local sales tax revenues, and should ensure stability in state and local revenues. 17
To address the challenges created by the growth of electronic commerce, the League of 18
Minnesota Cities continues to support the multi-state effort to develop a streamlined sales 19
tax system. 20
Should Congress intervene, the League would support nation-wide sales tax administration 21
standards based on the model developed by the Streamlined Sales Tax Project. The League 22
will oppose Congressional efforts to reverse remote retailer collection requirements. 23
FF-10. Local Lodging Taxes 24
Issue: In 2011, the legislature amended Minn. Stat. § 297A.61 to define accommodation 25
intermediaries and clarified that their services are subject to the state sales tax as part of the tax 26
imposed on lodging. Local lodging taxes collected by the state for local units of government 27
224
under Minn. Stat. § 469.190, subd. 7, also clearly apply to services provided by these 1
accommodation intermediaries since these taxes are required under Minn. Stat. § 270C.171 to 2
use the definition for tax base contained in the general sales tax statute. 3
Since 2011, some accommodation intermediaries have not been collecting and remitting locally-4
administered lodging taxes based on the full cost of the accommodation plus the accommodation 5
intermediary services. There are currently 120 cities and towns that individually or jointly 6
impose lodging taxes for tourism purposes under Minn. Stat. § 469.190. Another five cities 7
impose a lodging tax that is administered locally under special law. Four local lodging taxes are 8
currently administered by the state. 9
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports legislation that will clarify that all 10
lodging taxes, whether administered by the state or administered locally, apply to the total 11
charges to the customer, including charges for services provided by accommodation 12
intermediaries. 13
FF-11. Taxation of Electric Generation Personal Property 14
Issue: Investor-owned utilities (IOUs) have a longstanding relationship with Minnesota cities. 15
IOUs site baseload power plants in host communities, and in exchange pay personal property tax 16
on attached generation machinery to the cities, counties and school districts hosting the plants. 17
These plants bring jobs to our communities, but they also create nuisances such as air pollution, 18
nuclear waste, noise, vibration, and coal train traffic. They also create security risks and take up 19
land that could be used for other, less disruptive commercial and industrial development. Cities 20
believe personal property taxes paid by IOUs are a fair compensation for the environmental and 21
economic costs of hosting baseload power plants. 22
IOUs argue that personal property tax relief is important to pass along to their shareholders and 23
ratepayers. However, only a few IOU shareholders and ratepayers actually live in the 24
communities hosting baseload power plants. Further, almost all new power plants receive 25
personal property tax exemptions from the Legislature, while host communities with existing, 26
non-exempt baseload plants will continue to have them for decades to come. 27
225
Currently the taxation of electric generation personal property represents the best method for 1
reimbursing host communities for the cost of hosting IOUs. 2
Response: Personal property taxes on attached electric generation machinery are a fair way 3
to spread the environmental and economic costs of electric generation power plants among 4
all IOU shareholders and ratepayers. The League of Minnesota Cities supports the 5
continuation of personal property taxes paid by IOUs to host communities for existing and 6
new facilities or a tax system which generates equal or greater revenue for host 7
communities. If the Department of Revenue or the Legislature chooses evaluate new 8
methods of utility taxation, the League supports the inclusion of these environmental and 9
economic costs in assessing the appropriate property taxes paid to host cities by electric 10
generation facilities. 11
FF-12. Electric Generation Taxation Reform 12
Issue: Currently, electric utilities are subject to a personal property tax on personal property 13
which is part of an electric generating, transmission, or distribution system. This tax has a 14
number of exemptions and exclusions which make a patchwork of taxation statewide. The 15
Department of Revenue issued a report on February 15, 2015 which laid out the details of this 16
tax system, stating, “The utility tax base comprised of these energy producing facilities is not 17
predictable. The unpredictability is a result of law and rule changes that determine the amount of 18
utility tax base available for host communities.” 19
Cities which host Investor-Owned Utility base load power plants have faced unpredictability in 20
tax base from both changes to state law regarding the personal property tax on electric generation 21
equipment and from changes in valuation due to the upgrade/depreciation cycle of equipment. 22
In the past, the Minnesota Legislature has considered a reform to the system of taxing electric 23
generation, which would repeal the personal property tax and all of its exclusions and 24
exemptions, and replace it with new approaches to valuing utility property. More recently, the 25
2021 tax bill passed by the legislature ordered the Department of Revenue to initiate a review of 26
the framework for valuations of property including utility property such as large electric 27
generating facilities. 28
226
Statutory changes to the system of electric generation taxation should not adversely affect host 1
city tax revenues. Any proposal to change the system must include some form of replacement aid 2
which compensates cities for adverse effects due to changing state law on electric generation 3
taxation. 4
Moreover, utility company appeals of Department of Revenue valuations of utility property can 5
cause significant turmoil for local governments, including property tax shifts onto residents and 6
businesses and—in the case of a successful tax court challenge by a utility—the possibility of 7
being forced to pay back taxes that have already been collected and spent in prior years. As part 8
if its review of Rule 8100, the Department of Revenue has engaged with stakeholders in hopes of 9
identifying improvements that can benefit both local governments and the companies subject to 10
personal property taxes to increase stability, predictability, and reduce impacts on other 11
taxpayers. 12
Response: The personal property tax on electric generation equipment as well as the 13
exemptions, exclusions and sliding scales to that tax represent a patchwork of taxation 14
rules statewide. Changes to state law which replace the personal property tax on electric 15
generation equipment with a tax base valuation based on electric generation capacity, 16
production, nuclear storage, transmission, and distribution will benefit IOU host cities so 17
long as the change comes with a factor to increase the tax base valuation over time and 18
reimbursement to cities for revenues lost due to a change in state law. Likewise, any 19
changes to process by which investor owned utilities appeal the valuation of their property 20
should be made with the goal of reducing negative impacts on local governments, and 21
increasing stability, predictability, and transparency. 22
FF-13. Support for Transitioning Communities* 23
Issue: Technological advancements and market forces are rapidly changing the electric 24
generation industry. Investor-owned utilities (IOUs) in Minnesota are increasing the share of 25
their electric generation portfolios that are made up of renewable generation sources like wind 26
and solar, while planning to decrease the share of electric generation that is derived from 27
baseload power plants that produce energy from coal or nuclear sources. Due to the deep and 28
227
longstanding relationship IOUs have with some Minnesota cities, the possible retirement of these 1
power plants stands to have a significant disruptive effect on these cities. 2
Cities that host baseload power plants make significant investments to support those plants, 3
including infrastructure, public safety, and disaster preparedness. To compensate for this, IOUs 4
pay personal property tax on electric generation machinery. For some cities, these revenues can 5
account for over 50% of the city’s annual budget. Moreover, IOUs have other significant direct 6
and indirect impacts on host communities. IOUs tend to employ significant numbers of 7
employees at baseload power plants. Those employees are likely to live, work, attend school, and 8
shop in and around the local community. Therefore, the of the retirement of these plants would 9
have significant negative impacts on these communities. 10
While the power that is generated at these facilities goes to support the entire state of Minnesota, 11
the impacts of hosting these plants is felt most acutely in these local communities. In recent 12
years, the State of Minnesota has taken steps to support cities facing these unique 13
circumstances, including the creation of the Community Energy Transition Grant Program 14
under Minn. Stat. § 116J.551, and the creation of the Energy Transition Office and Advisory 15
Committee under Minn. Stat. § 116J.5491 – 5493. In 2023 the legislature established an electric 16
generation transition aid under 477a.24 for counties, cities, townships, and school districts that 17
lose tax base when an electric generation plant is retired. The initial aid amount is equal to the 18
tax base lost due to the retirement times the jurisdiction’s tax rate in the year prior to the tax base 19
loss. The aid is phased out over 20 years. 20
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities recognizes that the energy landscape is rapidly 21
changing and supports state policies to replace tax base in communities facing the closure 22
of a baseload power plant, as well as other policies or programs to help those communities 23
replace their local tax base through economic development. The League of Minnesota 24
Cities also support efforts by the state legislature and state agencies to study, analyze, and 25
design policy solutions to address the unique challenges these communities face. 26
228
FF-14. Taxation of Municipal Bond Interest 1
Issue: The federal and state laws that grant a tax exemption to bondholders for municipal bond 2
interest lowers borrowing costs for cities and reduces property tax levies. Recent proposed 3
Internal Revenue Service rules would potentially restrict some local government entities such as 4
housing and redevelopment authorities, economic development authorities and port authorities 5
from issuing tax exempt bonds. 6
Response: Congress and the state should maintain the tax exemption for municipal bond 7
interest income. Congress should also clarify the law to supersede proposed IRS rules and 8
thereby continue to allow housing and redevelopment authorities, economic development 9
authorities and port authorities to issue tax exempt debt. 10
FF-15. Pollution Control Exemption 11
Issue: Minnesota grants electric utilities and several other industries a property tax exemption 12
for personal and real property that is primarily used for pollution control. Minnesota adopted the 13
property tax exemption that now extends to electrical generation systems, agricultural operations, 14
and wastewater treatment facilities in 1967, before water and air pollution were heavily regulated 15
by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. The 16
language and the purpose of these statutes have evolved through the years. When states first 17
began adopting these tax incentives in the 1960s, they hoped to encourage utilities, industrial 18
plants, and others to install pollution control equipment. Gradually, as regulation increased, 19
states adopted the exemptions to help companies offset the cost of the equipment. 20
This tax benefit erodes local tax bases. In 2013, more than $1.8 billion of personal and real 21
property for electrical generation was exempted from the market value of utilities. The incentive 22
value of this benefit is low because utility companies are required to install the equipment 23
anyway. In addition, these companies frequently recover the cost of the equipment through rate 24
riders granted by the Public Utilities Commission. Allowing the pollution control equipment 25
exemption places the cost of this equipment on the citizens of the host community, rather than 26
the purchasers of electricity. 27
229
Response: The pollution control exemption places an undue burden on host communities 1
without incentivizing the environmentally responsible behavior that it was originally 2
created to encourage. The League of Minnesota Cities supports narrowing or eliminating 3
the pollution control equipment exemption for investor-owned electric generation facilities. 4
The League would also support allowing utilities to continue to recover their costs relating 5
to the pollution control equipment by spreading those costs to electricity users. 6
FF-16. Representative Democracy and Local Control 7
Issue: Local officials are elected by citizens to make decisions on behalf of their community, 8
including important taxation and expenditure decisions. At times, the legislature has enacted 9
blunt tools such as levy limits to supersede the discretion of city councils. Levy limits replace 10
local accountability with a state judgment about the appropriate level of local taxation and local 11
services. Additionally, state restrictions on local budgets, ordinances and fees can unnecessarily 12
restrict the abilities of city councils to respond to local needs and also have a negative effect on a 13
city’s bond rating due to the restriction on revenue flexibility. 14
As city officials try to plan for future local needs, levy limits can be as much a floor as a ceiling 15
on local government levies as local officials try to anticipate future state actions by “levying to 16
the limit” to preserve future levy authority. 17
Levy limits also fail to account for the decertification of tax increment financing districts. Upon 18
decertification, the property taxes that were formerly collected and used to support the public 19
improvements in the TIF district can no longer be collected at the same rate and used to support 20
ongoing general city operations. 21
Response: Local elected officials are elected to make decisions about local issues and 22
concerns and act to meet community needs in the short-term and the long-term. City 23
councilmembers and city mayors are elected by the citizens of their community to 24
represent them in the decision-making processes for and on behalf of their communities. 25
Those elected to serve are best suited to make decisions closest to the people most closely 26
affected. They make decisions about their activities in their city which are reflective of 27
their adopted municipal ordinances and annually adopted fee schedules. Local budgets, 28
230
fees and ordinances are based on each particular city’s own particular unique community 1
needs, attributes and considerations. The League of Minnesota Cities supports the 2
principle of representative democracy that allows local officials to make decisions without 3
state or other restrictions. 4
FF-17. Tax Hearing and Notification Process* 5
Issue: Cities must set a preliminary levy by September 30, which is the levy used to compute the 6
parcel-specific property tax notification forms. With only a few limited exemptions (e.g., voter-7
approved levies, levies for natural disasters and levies for certain tort judgments), this 8
preliminary levy, by law, becomes the maximum that cities can levy the following year. As a 9
result, cities may be unable to budget for unforeseen needs that arise after September 30. 10
In 2021, the legislature added Minn. Stat. § 275.065, subd. 3b that requires cities over 500 11
population to provide the county with summary budget information consistent with the summary 12
budget report submitted to the State Auditor under Minn. Stat. § 6.745 for the proposed budget 13
and the current budget. Although the requirement was delayed until the process to set 2023 14
budgets, cities will have a new, complicated reporting process that will add considerable 15
information to the annual proposed property tax statement. In addition, rather than explaining 16
city’s proposed budget, the amount of new information could overwhelm taxpayers. 17
Response: Cities should have the authority to increase the final levy from the preliminary 18
levy with the approval of the commissioner of the Department of Revenue, to meet 19
additional, unforeseen and uncontrollable needs, including arbitrator awards resulting 20
from labor negotiations, the impact of new and existing federal or state mandates including 21
administrative rules, or other non-discretionary budget factors. 22
The tax hearing and notification law should be carefully reviewed to assure that the 23
legislative intent is reflected in the statutes. 24
Specifically, the League of Minnesota Cities supports the following: 25
a) Modifying Minn. Stat. § 275.065 to clearly and fully exclude cities of population 500 and 26
under from the budget and levy hearing requirements; 27
231
b) Reinstating the exception to the tax hearing and notification requirements for cities 1
with more than 500 residents with a proposed levy increase below the implicit price 2
deflator (IPD); and 3
c) The summary budget information requirement enacted under the 2021 omnibus tax bill 4
should be evaluated for effectiveness and value to taxpayers. The requirement should 5
be converted to a suggested option and cities should be able to substitute their 6
established local process and format to explain their proposed budget to taxpayers. 7
In order to assist local officials with the challenge of explaining legislative changes to the 8
property tax system, legislators should attend and be encouraged to participate in local 9
government budget hearings in their districts. 10
FF-18. General Election Requirement for Ballot Questions 11
Issue: Under current state law, when cities are required to seek voter approval on a ballot 12
question or where statutes allow voters to petition for an election on a council action (reverse 13
referendum), these referenda can generally be held at a general or special election. This 14
flexibility allows cities to respond to local circumstances in a timely manner. 15
Response: Cities should be allowed to conduct elections on ballot questions at a date and 16
time set by the city council and that complies with existing election notification statutes. 17
FF-19. City Fund Balances 18
Issue: As a component of a prudent financial management plan, cities maintain a fund balance 19
composed of cash flow funds, savings for projects, and rainy-day reserves to maintain high level 20
bond ratings and to minimize borrowing costs. Although the size of a city’s fund balance should 21
be determined through local financial needs and local preferences, some cities are being 22
criticized for maintaining “excessive” reserves. As the recent pandemic unfolded, there were 23
calls to delay tax payments by property owners, citing city fund balances as evidence that cities 24
could absorb cash flow delays. 25
232
The Office of the State Auditor (OSA) report measures city fund balances on December 31, 1
shortly after the city receives its largest sources of revenue from the property tax and state aid 2
distributions. Measuring at this time, however, yields a picture of a high fund balance even 3
though the city will spend down these funds to cash flow the next five to six months of its 4
operations. 5
Response: The state should respect local decisions on adequacy of local fund balances. The 6
League of Minnesota Cities opposes any attempt to divert local reserves to benefit the state 7
budget or use reserves as a rationale for state aid cuts or property tax payment delays. 8
FF-20. Local Option Sales Tax and City Revenue Diversification* 9
Issue: Under current state law, the property tax is the only generally accessible form of local tax 10
revenue for cities. Allowing cities to diversify their revenue stream would help prevent rapid 11
additional future reliance on the property tax. 12
The basic public finance rationale for diversification of local tax systems is rooted in the fact that 13
economists generally agree that there is no perfect tax. Each tax has unique strengths and 14
weaknesses and the more intensively any single tax type is used, the more obvious its 15
shortcomings become. For example, the property tax is generally regarded as being very stable 16
throughout the economic cycle and it is considered to be a relatively easy tax to administer and 17
enforce. However, when property tax burdens become too high, there may be negative 18
consequences for other public policy objectives such as business development and home 19
ownership. 20
In addition to avoiding the problems created by excessive reliance on any single tax, a balanced 21
and diversified revenue system for Minnesota cities may create a more favorable business 22
climate and provide for greater stability of revenues to the recipient government unit throughout 23
the course of the economic cycle. 24
Under Minn. Stat. § 297A.99, the Legislature has created a set of local sales tax rules and a 25
defined process by which cities and other political subdivisions can impose a general local option 26
sales tax. Although the statutory process requires the city council to adopt a resolution 27
233
supporting the local sales tax, the process continues to require the authorization of the local sales 1
tax by the Legislature through the passage of a special law before finally seeking voter approval 2
at a general election. 3
The 2019 requirement to have separate ballot questions for each project has challenged cities to 4
draft ballot questions that are clear to voters. Each question must describe the project and the 5
sales tax that will support the proposed project however, the requirement could confuse voters 6
that each project would result in separate sales tax rate increases that would be cumulative. 7
Cities are also currently prohibited from imposing a new sales tax for a period of one-year from 8
the expiration of an existing local sales tax under Minn. Stat. § 297A.99, subd. 3(d), which 9
creates an administrative challenge for retailers who collect the local sales taxes when local sales 10
taxes blink off and then on again for a new project. 11
City requests for sales tax authority continue to increase. In 2019, the legislature granted local 12
sales tax authority to an additional 16 cities and in 2021, an additional 16 cities were authorized 13
to conduct a referendum to impose new or expanded local sales taxes. In 2023 the legislature 14
authorized 32 cities for either new local sales taxes or modifications to existing authority. 15
Additionally, the 2023 legislature created a two year moratorium on future consideration of any 16
local sales tax authorizations and created a task force to make recommendations on how these 17
requests should be handled moving forward. In 2022, 15 cities followed the process and an 18
additional four cities sought adjustments to their local sales taxes initially authorized in 2021 to 19
cover unexpected cost increases in building materials and interest rates that occurred after their 20
special laws were enacted, however, the legislature failed to pass a tax bill and therefore none of 21
the authorizations were enacted. 22
Response: Cities should be able to diversify their sources of revenues. The League of 23
Minnesota Cities continues to support a statutory change to generally allow a city to enact 24
a local sales tax for public improvements and capital replacement costs, including but not 25
limited to those specified in the 2019 legislation: 26
a) Convention or civic centers; 27
b) Public libraries; 28
234
c) Parks, trails, and recreational facilities; 1
d) Overpasses, arterial and collector roads, or bridges, on, adjacent to, or connecting to a 2
Minnesota state highway; 3
e) Railroad overpasses or crossing safety improvements; 4
f) Transportation infrastructure improvements, including construction, repair of 5
roadways, bridges and airports; 6
g) Flood control and protection; 7
h) Water quality projects to address groundwater and drinking water pollution problems; 8
i) Court facilities; 9
j) Fire, law enforcement, or public safety facilities; or 10
k) Municipal buildings. 11
Local sales taxes would follow the process outlined in Minn. Stat. § 297A.99 but without the 12
need for the approval by the Legislature and governor through the passage of special 13
legislation. 14
The existing general law governing local sales (Minn. Stat. § 297A.99) should be modified 15
as follows: 16
a) The local referendum requirement under Minn. Stat. § 297A.99, subd. 3(a) should be 17
clarified to allow the referendum to occur at any November election, regardless of 18
whether a city has candidates or questions on the ballot or a special election. 19
b) The requirement for separate ballot questions for each proposed project under Minn. 20
Stat. § 297A.99, subd. 3(a) should be clarified, possibly through changes to the structure 21
of the ballot, to avoid voter confusion. Alternatively, the legislature should consider 22
allowing a city the option of combining projects into a single ballot question. 23
235
c) The current prohibition on imposing a new local sales tax for a period of one-year from 1
the expiration of an existing local sales tax under Minn. Stat. § 297A.99, subd. 3(d), 2
creates administrative challenges for retailers and should be repealed. 3
d) The general law outlining the local sales tax process or individual special laws should 4
allow a city the flexibility to modify the ballot question to increase the total amount of 5
the sales tax collected and extend the duration of tax to cover unanticipated project cost 6
increases. 7
State law should also be modified to generally authorize any city to impose other types of 8
taxes such as a local payroll tax or an entertainment tax with the adoption of a supporting 9
resolution by the city council and after approval by the voters at a general or special 10
election. 11
In addition, Minn. Stat. § 469.190 should amended to allow cities to impose up to a five 12
percent local lodging tax and to allow cities to modify the uses of their local lodging tax 13
revenues to meet local needs. Cities should also have general authority to create utilities, 14
similar to the storm sewer utility authority, in order to fund local services where benefit or 15
usage of the service can be measured. 16
FF-21. City Franchise Authority 17
Issue: Under Minn. Stat. ch. 216B and Minn. Stat. § 301B.01, a city may require a public utility 18
furnishing gas or electric utility services or occupying streets, highways or other public property 19
within a municipality to obtain a franchise to operate within the community. In addition, cable 20
system operators are required to obtain a franchise under Minn. Stat. ch. 238. 21
Under a franchise, the city may require the utility to pay a fee to the municipality to raise 22
revenue or to defray increased municipal costs, such as maintenance and reconstruction costs, 23
accruing as a result of utility operations, or both. 24
State law currently allows the franchise fee to be based upon gross operating revenues or gross 25
earnings of the utility from its operations in the municipality. In this manner, all utility users 26
within the municipality contribute to the public costs associated with the utility operation. In the 27
236
absence of franchise fees, municipal costs resulting from utility operations are currently being 1
funded by property taxpayers. 2
Many cities also have policies related to utility company services and products that could be 3
supported under conditions of a franchise agreement, such as local renewable energy and energy 4
efficiency programs. Current statutes do not explicitly provide city authority to include those 5
types of performance conditions in a franchise agreement. 6
Under current law, cities are permitted to engage citizens when discussing a new or renewed 7
franchise fee arrangement in the manner that best fits the community. A recent legislative 8
proposal would have added a prescriptive notification and reverse referendum requirement to the 9
process of imposing or renewing a franchise agreement with a gas or an electric utility. 10
Response: Municipal authority to collect franchise fee revenues from utilities is an 11
important and equitable mechanism to offset the costs of maintaining public right-of-way 12
and to generate a return on a publicly held asset. Municipal franchise authority must be 13
preserved and should be expanded to allow city policy priorities to be addressed through 14
conditions in franchise agreements that have the cost covered by local ratepayers, where 15
appropriate, and can be accomplished within the local franchise boundaries. The League 16
opposes adding a one-size-fits-all notification requirement and a reverse referendum 17
procedure to the gas and electric franchise fee process. In addition, in situations where a 18
local provider decides to sell their operations, the city must have the right of first refusal to 19
purchase the assets of the utility. 20
FF-22. Utility Valuation Transition Aid* 21
Issue: In 2007, the Minnesota Department of Revenue revised its rules regarding the valuation of 22
electric and natural gas utility property. This change in the rules resulted in valuation changes 23
for utility property that dramatically reduced the amount of revenue that local governments will 24
collect in property tax from these utilities. 25
Recognizing that the communities that host these utilities bear extraordinary burdens connected 26
with stress on local infrastructure, public safety, and public nuisance due to the presence of these 27
237
facilities in their communities, the Legislature created the Utility Valuation Transition Aid 1
program. This program compensates host communities that have lost more than 4 percent of 2
their net tax capacity as a result of Department of Revenue’s rule changes. 3
Currently the taxation of electric generation personal property represents the best method for 4
reimbursing host communities for the cost of hosting IOUs. However, a 2015 MN Department of 5
Revenue study on electric generation taxation has generated proposals to change the state system 6
of taxing electric generation which raise equal or greater revenues for host cities. 7
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the continuation of the Utility 8
Valuation Transition Aid program and opposes any efforts to change statutory language or 9
to divert promised funds away from host communities for any purpose unless statutory 10
language replaces promised funds with equal or greater revenue to host communities. If 11
the Legislature does determine that it is necessary to re-allocate the funds in the Utility 12
Valuation Transition Aid program for another purpose, the League supports other 13
legislative efforts that would compensate the host communities for the economic and 14
environmental costs of hosting these facilities through reimbursement from the investor-15
owned utilities. These other efforts could include, but are not limited to, increasing the 16
class rate on utility property to the extent that it would offset the negative effects of the 17
utility valuation rule change. 18
FF-23. State Assistance for Property Tax Refunds for State-Assessed Property 19
Issue: State law requires certain property, including pipelines, railroad, utility property be 20
assessed for property taxation purposes by the Minnesota Department of Revenue. When 21
companies challenge the valuation of these properties, local units of government may be required 22
to refund excess taxes, which in some cases, can create financial hardship for local units of 23
government and their taxpayers. 24
In 2021, the legislature appropriated $29.4 million from the state’s general fund to reimburse a 25
pipeline company for the tax court judgment. However, this one-time appropriation will not 26
provide assistance to other recent tax court decisions. 27
238
Response: The state should establish a permanent program to provide financial 1
compensation to all units of local government for court ordered property tax refunds 2
where the state has determined values. 3
FF-24. Transition for Property Acquired by Tax-Exempt Entities 4
Issue: When an existing taxable property is acquired by a tax-exempt entity other than a city or a 5
city development authority or otherwise becomes tax exempt and removed from the tax base, the 6
taxes formerly paid by the property owner are shifted to other, remaining taxable properties 7
within the jurisdiction. When the acquired property is a large percentage of the tax base of a city 8
or other local unit of government, the shift in taxes can be substantial. 9
Response: The state should establish a program to provide financial compensation to all 10
units of local government for court ordered property tax refunds where the state has 11
determined values. 12
FF-25. Payments for Services to Tax-Exempt Property 13
Issue: Taxable property in many cities is being acquired by nonprofit and government entities. 14
Converting the property to tax-exempt status can lead to serious tax base erosion without any 15
corresponding reduction in the service needs created by the property. 16
In 2013, legislation was introduced that would have broadly exempted non-profit property from 17
paying user fees or service charges for any service funded in part with property taxes over the 18
previous five years. Under certain circumstances, this proposal could have potentially exempted 19
non-profits from paying for even utility charges. 20
Response: Cities should have the authority to collect payments from statutorily-exempt 21
property owners to cover costs of service similar to the authority provided under the 22
special assessment law. The League of Minnesota Cities opposes legislation that would 23
exempt non-profits from paying for user fees and service charges that help fund services 24
these organizations use. 25
239
FF-26. Housing Improvement Areas and Special Service Districts Petitioned 1
by Business* 2
Issue: In 1996, cities were granted general authority under Minn. Stat. §§ 428A.11-.21 to use 3
Housing Improvement Areas (HIAs) in order to finance housing improvements for condominium 4
and townhome complexes. Several cities around the state have used this tool and found it to be a 5
useful mechanism for maintaining older association homes. 6
The 2013 Legislature also granted HIA authority to a county Community Development 7
Authority (CDA). As part of that authority, the CDA is required to gather local approval before 8
creating an HIA. 9
In 1996, the Legislature also gave cities the general authority to create Special Service Districts 10
(SSDs) under Minn. Stat. §§ 428A.01-.101. Cities around the state have used this tool to provide 11
an increased level of service to commercial or industrial areas, commonly in areas of retail 12
concentration. SSDs are established at the request of local businesses, who ultimately pay for and 13
benefit from the increased level of service. A SSD may be established anywhere in a city but 14
only business property (i.e. commercial, industrial, utility, or land zoned for commercial or 15
industrial use) will be subject to the service charge. Some special services have included street 16
and sidewalk cleaning, snow and ice removal, lighting, signage, parking, parking enforcement, 17
marketing and promotion, landscaping, and security. A SSD may be established only by petition 18
and the city adopts an ordinance to establish it. Minn. Stat. §§ 428A.09-10 establishes 19
procedures for the business owners in the SSD to veto or end the SSD. The 2013 legislature 20
extended the sunset for both tools for 15 years, making it set to expire on June 30, 2028. In 2017, 21
the House considered legislation that was ultimately unsuccessful to repeal the general SSD 22
authority for cities. There are currently over 15 cities that have established SSDs around the 23
state. 24
Additionally, in addressing the changing landscape of modern urban cores and the increase of 25
multi-family properties in downtown areas, the 2023 legislature allowed qualified multi-family 26
properties to be included in SSDs. 27
240
As cities work to develop and/or redevelop commercial, industrial, and residential areas, new 1
ways of paying for and providing increased levels of service should be available to local entities. 2
Use of Special Service Districts in mixed-use development is one tool that could be available for 3
this purpose. 4
Response: The Legislature should give cities permanent authority to create HIAs and SSDs. 5
The League of Minnesota Cities supports the authority for cities to work with multi-family 6
properties and businesses their business communities to establish SSDs and opposes efforts 7
to restrict general authority of the tool. 8
The League also supports the potential use of SSDs for mixed-use districts that include 9
residential and commercial/industrial properties. The law should be reviewed to determine 10
to what extent mixed-use properties can and should contribute to a Special Service District 11
from which they will benefit. The League would support legislation that expands SSDs to 12
include mixed-use development to the extent it balances the benefits and obligations of 13
residential properties within the district. 14
If the Legislature grants multi-jurisdictional entities the authority to create HIAs, creation 15
of an HIA must require local approval. 16
FF-27. Tax-Forfeited Properties and Local Special Assessments 17
Issue: Special assessments are a charge authorized by the Legislature and state law, imposed on 18
properties for a particular improvement that benefits those selected properties. Cities follow 19
complex, time-consuming statutory special assessment procedures to specially assess the 20
appropriate amount of the local infrastructure improvements to those properties. 21
If a property with validly attached special assessments goes into tax-forfeiture, the county auditor 22
cancels all of the local special assessments due and remaining unpaid on each parcel, which is 23
authorized in Minn. Stat. § 282.07. Therefore, the city loses the funds previously budgeted and 24
planned for to pay for the local improvements. To underline this point, the funds have already 25
been expended and if not collected, result in losses to the city. 26
241
When tax-forfeited land returns to private ownership, and the parcel benefitted from an 1
improvement for which the city canceled special assessments because of the forfeiture, the city 2
may assess or reassess the parcel. But cities must go through the same cumbersome notice and 3
hearing procedures in order to re-attach the assessments. 4
Response: The Legislature should remove cancellation of local special assessments from 5
state law, allowing cities to receive the funding validly assessed and counted on to fund 6
local infrastructure improvements. 7
FF-28. Distribution of Proceeds from the Sale of Tax-Forfeit Property 8
Issue: When properties go into tax forfeiture all levels of government lose tax revenue that 9
would otherwise support the services they provide. It is always in the best interest of taxpayers to 10
return these properties to the tax rolls as quickly as possible. 11
Although the tax forfeiture process is controlled by the county, and counties have a legitimate 12
need to be reimbursed for reasonable administrative costs, the city often has more at stake 13
financially in terms of costs fronted to facilitate development (e.g., assessments for public 14
infrastructure and unpaid development or utility fees). While the tax forfeit procedure provides a 15
process for the repayment of special assessments, it does not require the repayment of unpaid 16
utility charges or unpaid building and development fees. Further, due to large assessments that 17
some cities are left with, it may not be practical to sell a tax-forfeited property subject to a 18
special assessment, and city taxpayers may be forced to absorb the sunk costs of a project in 19
order to sell the property. 20
State statutes governing the apportionment of the proceeds from the sale of tax forfeit property 21
allow counties to first recover administrative costs related to the tax forfeiture process before 22
subsequent allocations are made for special assessments and hazardous waste cleanup associated 23
with the property. State law is unclear whether the proceeds from a tax forfeiture transaction 24
should be used to reimburse the county only for the expenses associated with the transacted 25
parcel, or if the proceeds can be used to reimburse the county for administrative costs associated 26
with other parcels that were not transacted. When the latter allocation method is employed by a 27
county, the transaction proceeds can be disproportionately applied to county administrative costs 28
242
resulting in a lower allocation of remaining proceeds to cover existing special assessments, 1
hazardous waste cleanup costs and ultimately the final allocation of residual tax forfeit sale 2
proceeds to cities. 3
In addition, counties are allowed to use 30 percent of the amount remaining after the deduction 4
for administrative expenses and the repayment of special assessments for forest development 5
projects and then 20 percent of any remaining proceeds for county parks and recreation projects. 6
The structure of the distribution of the proceeds frequently results in cities receiving a very small 7
percentage of the initial forfeit sale proceeds. As a result, cities may not recoup even a portion of 8
the unpaid taxes or special assessments owed on a property. 9
In most cases, cities and counties work collaboratively to ensure that properties are returned to 10
the tax rolls quickly to benefit all taxpayers. However, when consensus is not reached, the tax 11
forfeiture statutes place cities at a disadvantage and can disproportionately burden the taxpayers 12
of the city in which the properties are located. 13
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities believes the tax forfeiture statutes should be 14
reviewed and amended as necessary to ensure that the needs of city and county taxpayers 15
are properly balanced. Specifically, the League supports changes in the distribution of the 16
proceeds from the sale of tax forfeit property contained in Minn. Stat. § 282.08 to elevate 17
the priority for repayment of unpaid charges for electricity, water and sewer charges 18
certified pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 444.075 subd. 3(e), and any unpaid fees prescribed 19
pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 462.353 subd. 4(a), to require those unpaid charges and fees to be 20
repaid immediately after unpaid special assessments. 21
The proceeds from the sale of a tax forfeited parcel should be used to pay the assessments 22
and administrative and development costs for the transacted parcel. Minn. Stat. § 282.09 23
should be amended to prevent the proceeds from the sales of a tax forfeited parcel to be 24
used to pay excessive administrative costs or the costs for other parcels in the county until 25
the city is fairly reimbursed for unpaid assessments and development costs of the 26
transacted parcel. 27
243
Before the final distribution of any remaining proceeds from the sale of tax forfeited land 1
are distributed to cities, counties, and school districts, Minn. Stat. § 282.08(4)(i) and (ii) 2
give counties the right to take up to half of those proceeds for county forest development 3
and county park and recreation areas. The League also supports the elimination of these 4
separate statutory apportionments while allowing counties to use their designated 40 5
percent share of the remaining proceeds for these uses. 6
FF-29. State Hazard Mitigation and Response Support 7
Issue: Cities in Minnesota are exposed to extreme weather events such as winds, flooding, fires, 8
and drought and are facing the severe financial consequences of the clean-up, repairs, and 9
community social and economic recovery, even though damages may be deemed “not of such 10
severity and magnitude” as to qualify for federal assistance. 11
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities calls on our legislators and state executive 12
agencies charged with hazard mitigation planning to address not only a response to 13
extreme weather events but to also put into place a proactive strategy to minimize or 14
mitigate the financial consequences. At a minimum, this effort should offer a reasonable 15
loan funding program that is easily accessible by cities, businesses and homeowners to 16
financially recover and rebuild, with the ultimate goal of preserving jobs, industries, and 17
communities. 18
The state response should allow for the use of new technology and best management 19
practices for any reconstruction of infrastructure to lessen the impact of future disasters 20
and to mitigate the effects of disasters resulting from future extreme weather events. 21
FF-30. Library Funding* 22
Issue: State law requires that local governments maintain a minimum level of funding for public 23
library services. This is collectively known as “state-certified levels of library support,” or more 24
commonly known as, “maintenance of effort (MOE)” and is described in Minn. Stat. § 134.34. 25
A majority of public libraries in Minnesota belong a regional library system, which is the entity 26
that receives library funding from the Minnesota Department of Education. Six of the 12 regional 27
244
library systems are structured as a federated system where the individual libraries or library 1
systems operate autonomously from the regional library system but they can utilize certain 2
services such as inter-library loan distribution, digital card cataloging, which capitalize on 3
economies of effort from partnering with the other libraries in the regional system. The MOE for 4
any city that taxes separately for library services is now set at 90% of the amount established in 5
2011 (see Minn. Stat. § 275.761). In 2011, it was calculated using a formula that included 6
payments made in the form of the library employee salaries, payments toward operating the 7
facility, purchasing materials from the library, and other operating costs, adjusted net tax 8
capacity, and several other factors. The other half of the state’s public library systems are 9
consolidated systems, where the regional library system runs the libraries through a joint powers 10
agreement with counties and participating cities. The regional library system has a board and 11
hires the director. A city that participates in the regional system will have an MOE (calculated as 12
described above). The city MOE may include dollars provided directly to the regional library 13
system or operating dollars provided to support building costs (i.e. city-provided maintenance 14
services). 15
In the metropolitan area, the seven county library systems and one city library system belong to 16
the Metropolitan Library Services Agency (MELSA), the metro area regional library system. 17
Most of the cities that operate libraries independently from their county library system belong to 18
MELSA as affiliates of their county library system. The funding of libraries in MELSA may be 19
from a county levy, a city levy, a city library fund from the general city levy or a combination. 20
Most libraries not only serve city residents, but also serve people that reside outside of city limits 21
who, in some cases, are not fully contributing to the upkeep, maintenance or operations of the 22
library through property tax levies. While counties do contribute to municipal libraries, this 23
support falls well short of the per capita amounts contributed by city residents. 24
City officials support libraries and believe that a system of equitably funded libraries is needed. 25
One approach that has been previously approved by the Legislature is providing for funding 26
through regional tax levies designated as “library districts.” A district would have the authority 27
to levy for public library services in lieu of their member cities and counties. Under Minn. Stat. 28
245
§ 134.201, the Great River Regional Library System and the East Central Regional Library 1
System already have authority to create “library districts.” 2
Some cities also contribute a supplemental amount of funding separate from MOE requirements, 3
usually to pay for building maintenance costs. When the state calculates the required MOE for 4
each local unit of government, local building costs are included in city MOE requirements and 5
all monies cities contribute to a library building, except capital, are taken into account. The MOE 6
requirement is a mandate on cities that does not allow for local decision making. However, it 7
provides a stable source of funding to protect the investment in library resources and services 8
around the state. There are some groups that are advocating for a restoration of the MOE to 9
levels at least as high as the 2010 level. 10
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports sufficient, stable and equitable funding 11
for local libraries to allow for local budget decision making. The League urges the state 12
legislature to increase funding for Regional Library Basic System Support in order to 13
amend the distribution of these funds to provide more stability and equity to each of the 12 14
regional public library systems. Specifically, the LMC supports: 15
a) Amending the distribution formula to increase the Basic System Services factor from 16
5% to 15% and reduce the Equalization factor from 25% to 15%; 17
b) Increasing the total appropriation from the current $13.57M/year to an amount 18
necessary to hold all 12 regional systems harmless through the formula change. 19
The League supports changes to the library maintenance of effort by the Legislature as 20
follows: 21
a) The required annual payment should reflect the amount the city itself pays toward 22
maintenance, upkeep, and capital improvements to the library in that year. 23
b) If the MOE reduction in Minn. Stat. § 275.761 is restored to a level at least as high as 24
the 2010 level, it should be phased in over three years. 25
c) Any relief provided to the county MOE requirement should not result in additional 26
funding requirements to cities. 27
246
The League also supports the creation of general authority for library systems to create 1
library taxing districts and the authority for municipal libraries to charge non-residents for 2
membership and/or other services without the loss of any State or Federal aids. 3
FF-31. Park and Library Land Tax Break 4
Issue: As the price for land increases, it is becoming more difficult for cities and other local units 5
of government to compete with developers to save and secure land and easements that are 6
deemed appropriate for park, library, trail, and green spaces. 7
Response: The state should amend the tax laws to provide tax incentives for property 8
owners who sell land and easements to local units of government when the land is to be 9
used for park, library, trail or green space purposes. 10
FF-32. Increasing Safe School Levy Authority 11
Issue: Strong partnerships between schools and local law enforcement are critical to school 12
safety. Police School Resource Officers (SROs) are valued professionals in school communities 13
and provide support, safety and security for students, staff and the public. Further, SROs can 14
provide regular opportunities for informal, positive interactions between students and police 15
personnel. 16
Under Minn. Stat. § 126C.44, the Safe Schools Levy allows school districts to levy for costs 17
associated with student and staff safety based on student enrollment numbers. Some eligible 18
expenses include police liaison services; drug abuse prevention programs; gang resistance 19
education training; school security; crime prevention; and implementation of student and staff 20
safety measures. 21
Using Safe Schools Levy authority, local school boards may raise additional resources for school 22
safety and security. Almost every Minnesota school district currently levies the full amount of 23
$36 per pupil. This amount does not cover the full cost of providing this important service, and 24
local law enforcement agencies are not being fully compensated for providing SROs. 25
247
Response: The League supports increasing the maximum Safe Schools Levy from $36 per 1
pupil up to $60 per pupil to ensure schools and communities are able to continue providing 2
safe schools programming. 3
FF-33. Equitable Funding of Community Education Services* 4
Issue: Under Minn. Stat. § 124D.20, school districts are authorized to levy for community 5
education programs that can include youth recreational activities. However, state statute limits 6
the total amount of revenue that can be raised by the school district to fund community education 7
programs and this limit has not been sufficiently increased in recent years. In many instances, 8
cities participate in the funding of these programs and with the statutory limit on the amount 9
school districts can levy, the increased cost of these programs is increasingly falling on cities and 10
their property taxpayers. In areas where the school district is significantly larger than the city, the 11
burden of funding these programs is falling disproportionately on city taxpayers while the 12
programs benefit the entire school district. In 2023 the legislature increased the basic community 13
education revenue allowance from $5.42 per capita to $6.35 per capita beginning in fiscal year 14
2025. 15
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports a periodicstatutory increase in the 16
community education revenue authorization for school districts. Increasing the amount of 17
the community service revenue available to school districts would provide a steady source 18
of revenue, which would be assessed against all properties in the school district, not just 19
against properties in the city. 20
FF-34. Street Reconstruction Bond Approval 21
Issue: Under Minnesota law, financing the maintenance of streets can be a challenge for city 22
councils. Minn. Stat. § 475.58 subd. 3b, authorizes a city council, by two-thirds vote, to approve 23
the issuance of bonds to finance street reconstruction or bituminous overlays without voter 24
approval. The two-thirds council approval requirement is further subject to a reverse referendum 25
process whereby a number equal to five percent of those voting in the last municipal general 26
election can petition for a referendum to approve the issuance of the bonds. 27
248
Response: Street maintenance is one of the essential functions of cities in Minnesota. The 1
laws governing issuance of bonds to maintain streets should be amended to allow the 2
approval of the bonds by a simple majority of the council. The existing reverse referendum 3
process assures that taxpayers could trigger a referendum on the issuance of bonds if they 4
can meet the five percent petition threshold. 5
FF-35. Special Assessment Election Requirements 6
Issue: City Councils are best situated to recognize the need to replace infrastructure and when to 7
schedule the replacement projects. Cities are often only able to carry out these and other vital 8
improvements by issuing bonds and assessing some amount of the cost to property owners. 9
Issuing bonds to finance most local improvement projects requires a special election unless the 10
city can legally collect at least 20% of the project costs through special assessments. As a legal 11
limit, cities cannot collect special assessments from any property greater than the increase in fair 12
market value bestowed to that property by the improvement (the "special benefit test"). On 13
occasion, the increase in property values as a result of the improvement can fail to add up to the 14
20% threshold necessary to finance projects without requiring a special election. 15
Response: In order to facilitate the financing of public infrastructure projects, the 16
threshold for requiring voter approval for issuance of improvement bonds under Minn. 17
Stat. 429.091 should be reduced to 15 percent. This change would provide more flexibility 18
for cities with their construction/bonding/assessment decisions and may be more likely to 19
survive a challenge while still providing value to the property owner. 20
FF-36. Homestead Market Value Exclusion* 21
Issue: In 2011, the legislature repealed the existing homestead market value credit program and 22
replaced it with a new Homestead Market Value exclusion (Minn. Stat. § 273.13, subd. 35). 23
Under the homestead market value exclusion, an amount equal to 40 percent of the assessor’s 24
estimate of the home’s market value for a home up to $76,000 in market value is excluded from 25
taxation. For homes in excess of $76,000 of market value, the exclusion phases out as home 26
249
values increase until it is totally phased out for homes over $413,800. The general parameters of 1
the program have not changed since 2011. 2
Recent trends in residential home values have significantly reduced the value of the exclusion for 3
many homeowners. According to the Minnesota Association of Realtors, in 2011, the median 4
sales price of homes in Minnesota, was $135,000, which received an exclusion of $25,090 or 5
nearly 19 percent of the total value of the home. In 2021, the median sales price was $306,750, 6
which received an exclusion of $9,633, or just 3.1 percent of the total value of the home. In 7
response to these rising home values, in 2023 the legislature modified the exclusion to equal 40% 8
of the first $95,000 of market value. For homesteads valued between $95,000 and $517,200, the 9
exclusion equals $38,000 minus 9% of the value over $95,000. Homesteads valued at $517,200 10
or more are not eligible to receive the exclusion. These changes are effective starting in 11
assessment year 2024. 12
During the 2022 legislative session, legislators considered proposals to increase the homestead 13
market value exclusion. The House would have increased the exclusion to 40 percent of the 14
value on the first $80,300 of value and extended the full phase-out to homes valued at up to 15
$437,100. The Senate would have increased the exclusion to 40 percent of the value on the first 16
$95,000 of value and extended the full phase-out to homes valued at up to $517,200. 17
Response: Due to the recent rapid increase in home values, the The League of Minnesota 18
Cities supports periodic modifications to the homestead market value exclusion program to 19
increase the benefit of the exclusion to qualifying homeowners. Changes to the homestead 20
market value exclusion should be considered in concert with the impact of the homestead 21
credit refund program 22
FF-37. State Fund for Non-weather-related Disaster/Catastrophe Relief 23
Issue: Municipalities and other governmental units are at risk of experiencing disastrous events 24
affecting their communities beyond natural disasters, whether from civil disturbances, industrial 25
catastrophes, or other disastrous events. Such events may result in unbudgeted and unfunded 26
costs related to clean-up, repairs, “social” and economic recovery, infrastructure restoration, 27
rebuilding structures, and other damage repair which may not be qualify for relief from Federal 28
250
resources. While some limited State resources may be available, cities do not have the resources 1
to respond to such disasters. 2
Response: The League of Minnesota Cities supports the creation of a state fund to assist 3
local communities in repair and response to these disastrous events with the ultimate goal 4
of preserving jobs, industries, and communities. 5
FF-NEW A. Park Dedication* 6
Issue: For decades, Minnesota cities have been permitted in Minnesota Law Chapter 462 to 7
adopt ordinances that require a reasonable portion of land be dedicated to the public, or to 8
impose a dedication fee on new housing units and new commercial and industrial development in 9
a city for parks. As a result, cities across the state have been able to create parkland that provides 10
intrinsic environmental, aesthetic, and recreation benefits to cities and their residents, which 11
enhances property values, increases municipal revenue, and supports local economic 12
development. However, current law only permits cities aside from Minneapolis and St. Paul to 13
collect parkland dedication only on subdivided land, which prohibits a city from collecting park 14
dedication or fees for redevelopment of existing parcels that does not require subdivision of the 15
property, but still generates need and impact for city parks. Cities with built out environments are 16
particularly disadvantaged as new residential units are added via redevelopment or infill 17
development without the ability for cities to assess a fee or land dedication for the new 18
residential units despite the increased demand for parks and green spaces from the new 19
residential units. 20
Response: The legislature should preserve existing city authority to require parkland 21
dedication and park dedication fees and amend Minn. Stat. § 462.358 to allow all cities the 22
option to require a reasonable portion of land or park dedication fee on new housing units 23
and new commercial and industrial development without the requirement that land be 24
subdivided.25
Legislative Policies
January 2024
Metro Cities
Association of Metropolitan Municipalities
145 University Ave. W.
St. Paul, Minnesota, 55103-2044
Phone: (651) 215-4000
Website: www.MetroCitiesMN.org Fax: (651) 281-1299 Twitter: @MetroCitiesMN
Ms. Patricia Nauman Mr. Mike Lund Ms. Ania McDonnell Ms. Jennifer Dorn
Executive Director Gov’t Relations Specialist Gov’t Relations Specialist Office Manager
(651) 215-4002 (651) 215-4003 (651) 215-4001 (651) 215-4004
Patricia@MetroCitiesMN.org Michael@MetroCitiesMN.org Ania@MetroCitesMN.org Jennifer@MetroCitiesMN.org
Table of Contents
2024 Legislative Policies
Municipal Revenue & Taxation 1
1-A State and Local Fiscal Relationship 1
1-B Revenue Diversification and Access 2 1-C Restrictions on Local Government Budgets 3 1-D Budget and Financial Reporting Requirements 3 1-E Local Government Aid (LGA)3
1-F State Property Tax Relief Programs 4
1-G Property Valuation Limits/Limited Market Value 4 1-H Market Value Homestead Exclusion Program 5 1-I Metropolitan Area Fiscal Disparities Program 5
1-J State Property Tax 6
1-K Class Rate Tax System 6 1-L Regional Facility Host Communities 6 1-M Sales Tax on Local Government Purchases 7 1-N City Revenue Stability and Fund Balance 7
1-O Public Employees’ Retirement Association (PERA)7
1-P State Program Revenue Sources 8 1-Q Post-Employment Benefits 9 1-R Health Care Insurance Programs 9
1-S State Budget Stability 9 1-T Taxation of Electronic Commerce 9 1-U Payments for Services to Tax Exempt Property 10 1-V Proceeds from Tax Forfeited Property 10 1-W Deputy Registrars 10
1-X Special Assessments 11
General Government 12
2-A Mandates, Zoning & Local Authority 12
2-B City Enterprise Activities 12
2-C Weapons on City Property 12 2-D 911 Telephone Tax 13 2-E 800 MHz Radio System 13 2-F Building Codes 13
2-G Administrative Fines 14
2-H Residential Programs 15 2-I Annexation 15 2-J Statewide Funding Sources for Local Issues with Regional Impact 16
2-K Urban Forest Management Funding 16
2-L Pollinator Habitat Resources 17 2-M Regulation of Harmful Substances and Products 17
Table of Contents
2024 Legislative Policies
Housing & Economic Development 27
Policies 3-A to 3-J: Introduction 27
3-A City Role in Housing 27 3-B City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing 28 3-C Inclusionary Housing 29 3-D Metropolitan Council Role in Housing 30
3-E Allocation of Affordable Housing Need 31
3-F Housing Policy & Production Survey 32 3-G State Role in Housing 32 3-H Federal Role in Affordable and Workforce Housing 35 3-I Vacant, Boarded, and Foreclosed Properties and Properties at Risk 36
3-J Housing Ordinance Enforcement 37 3-K Economic Development, Redevelopment and Workforce Readiness 37 3-K (1) Economic Development 38 3-K (2) Redevelopment 39
3-K (3) Workforce Readiness 40
3-L Tax Increment Financing (TIF)41 3-M Eminent Domain 43 3-N Community Reinvestment 44 3-O Business Incentives Policy 44
3-P Broadband Technology 45 3-Q City Role in Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development 46
3-R Impaired Waters 47
17 18 18 19 19 21 21 21 22 22 23
2-N Private Well Drilling Restriction Authority2-O Organized Waste Collection2-P Election Administration2-Q Utility Franchise Fees, Accountability and Cost Transparency2-R Water Supply2-S Regulation of Massage Therapists
2-T Peace Officer Arbitration Reform2-U Public Safety Training and Resources2-V Race Equity
2-W Street Racing2-X Carjacking2-NEW Adult-Use Cannabis2-NEW Emergency Medical Services
2-NEW Copper and Other Metal Theft2-NEW Open Meeting Law2-NEW School Resource Officers
25
232425
26
Table of Contents
2024 Legislative Policies
48
48
49 49 50
50
51 51 53 53
53 54 55 56 57
58 5859
Metropolitan Agencies
4-A Goals and Principles for Regional Governance4-B Regional Governance Structure4-C Comprehensive Analysis and Oversight of Metropolitan Council4-D Funding Regional Services
4-E Regional Systems4-F Regional Water Supply Planning4-G Review of Local Comprehensive Plans4-H Comprehensive Planning Process
4-I Comprehensive Planning Schedule4-J Local Zoning Authority4-K Regional Growth4-L Natural Resource Protection
4-M Inflow and Infiltration (I/I)4-N Sewer Availability Charge (SAC)4-O Funding Regional Parks & Open Space4-P Livable Communities
4-Q Density4-R Comprehensive Plans and Environmental Review
Transportation 61
Transportation Policies and Funding Introduction 61
5-A Road and Bridge Funding 61
5-B Regional Transit System 62 5-C Transit Financing 64 5-D Street Improvement Districts 64 5-E Highway and Bridge Turn Backs & Funding 65
5-F “3C” Transportation Planning Process: Elected Officials’ Role 65 5-G Electronic Imaging for Enforcement of Traffic Laws 65 5-H Transportation Network Companies and Alternative Transportation Modes 66 5-I Airport Noise Mitigation 66 5-J Funding for Non-Municipal State Aid (MSAS) City Streets 67
5-K County State Aid Highway (CSAH) Distribution Formula 67 5-L Municipal Input/Consent for Trunk Highways and County Roads 67 5-M Plat Authority 68 5-N MnDOT Maintenance Budget 68
5-O Transit Taxing District 68
5-P Complete Streets 69
60
Table of Contents
2024 Legislative Policies
Committee Rosters 70
Municipal Revenue & Taxation 70
Housing & Economic Development 71 Metropolitan Agencies 73 Transportation & General Government 74
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
1-A State and Local Fiscal Relationship
A functional state and local fiscal relationship must emphasize adequacy, equitability,
sustainability and accountability for public resources and communication among the state, cities,
and public. An effective partnership must also emphasize practices that strengthen collaboration
and partnership between the state and local units of government.
Services provided by cities are traditionally funded through a combination of property taxes,
fees, and state aids. Increasingly, cities are bearing more costs for services that have historically
been the responsibility of the state.
Metro Cities supports a state and local fiscal partnership that emphasizes the following:
•Strong financial stewardship and accountability for public resources that
emphasizes efficiencies in service delivery and effective communication among the
state, local units of government, and the public.
•Reliable and adequate revenue sources including the property tax and local
government aids, and dedicated funds to meet specific local needs. Metro Cities
opposes diverting dedicated funds or local aids to balance state budgets.
•Sufficient revenue sources available to cities that allow cities to address local needs
and citizens to receive adequate services at relatively similar levels of taxation, and
that maintain local, regional, and state economic vitality and competitiveness.
•Full state funding to cover mandates enacted by the state, and flexibility for local
governments in implementing state mandates to ensure local costs are minimized.
•Adequate and timely notification regarding new legislative programs or
modifications to existing programs or policies to allow cities time to plan for
implementation and manage any effects on local budgeting processes.
•Support for cooperative purchasing arrangements between the state and local units
of government. Such arrangements must be structured to be able to address
unexpected delays or other challenges in the procurement of goods, so that any
disruptions to local government operations and services that may result from such
delays are minimized. State officials should seek local feedback in the vetting of
product vendors.
1
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
•The concept of performance measuring, but opposition to using state established
measurements to determine the allocation of state aids to local governments or
restrict the ability of local governments in establishing local budgets and levies.
1-B Revenue Diversification and Access
Metro Cities supports a balanced and diversified revenue system that acknowledges diverse
city characteristics, needs and capacities and allows for greater stability in revenues.
The 2023 Legislature authorized several local taxes, and also established a temporary
moratorium and task force that will examine local sales taxes as a revenue mechanism. Metro
Cities continues to support the ability of a city to impose a local sales tax for public
improvements and capital replacement costs using local processes specified by law but
without the need for special legislation. Metro Cities supports changes to state laws
governing local taxes to include the following:
•A statutory clarification to allow a referendum to occur at any November election or
special election.
•A clarification of laws governing separate ballot questions for each proposed local
project or allowing a city to combine projects into a single question, to avoid voter
confusion.
•A repeal of the prohibition on imposing a local sales tax for one year from the
expiration of an existing local sales tax.
•Changes to laws on the local sales tax process to allow a city flexibility to modify a
ballot question to increase the amount of the collected tax and extend the duration
of tax to cover unanticipated cost increases.
The Legislature should recognize equity considerations involved with local sales taxes and
continue to provide aids to cities that have high needs, overburdens and/or low fiscal capacity.
Metro Cities supports a modification to laws governing local lodging taxes to allow cities to
impose up to a five percent lodging tax, and the ability of cities to modify the uses of
revenues to meet local needs. Metro Cities supports current laws providing for municipal
franchise fee authority and opposes statutory changes such as reverse referendum
requirements or other constraints that would reduce local authority and flexibility for
establishing, amending, or renewing franchise fees and interfere with local public processes
and goals for establishing such fees.
2
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
1-C Restrictions on Local Government Budgets
Metro Cities strongly opposes levy limits, reverse referenda, super majority requirements
for levy and valuation freezes, or other restrictions on local government budgeting and
taxing processes. Such restrictions undermine local budgeting and taxing processes, planned
growth, and the relationship between locally elected officials and their residents by allowing the
state to decide the appropriate level of local taxation and services, despite varying local
conditions and circumstances.
1-D Budget and Financial Reporting Requirements
State laws require cities to prepare and submit or publish numerous budget and financial reports.
These requirements often create significant costs to cities, and some requirements result in
duplication. Additional reporting requirements should have a clearly defined statement of public
purpose and need that is not covered under existing requirements and should balance needs for
additional information with the costs of compiling and submitting the information.
Considering the number of existing reporting requirements, Metro Cities supports
reducing the number of mandated reports. Metro Cities supports efforts to consolidate
municipal government financial reporting requirements in the Office of the State Auditor,
including an electronic submission alternative to any remaining paper filing requirements,
and to authorize the use of web publication where newspaper publication is currently
required.
While Metro Cities recognizes that enacted statutory requirements to the local truth-in-
taxation process enacted in 2022 are intended to enhance citizen involvement in budget
processes, the new requirements are significant and will be administratively challenging to
produce and disseminate. Existing requirements are expansive and were designed to
maximize citizen engagement in budgeting processes. Metro Cities will continue to monitor
the new law and its effects on local government processes and budgets.
1-E Local Government Aid (LGA)
The state’s prosperity and vitality depend significantly upon the economic strength of the
metropolitan region, and cities within the region play critical roles in fostering the economic
development, job creation and business expansion that underpin the state’s economic health.
Metro Cities supports the city Local Government Aid (LGA) program as a means of
ensuring cities remain affordable places to live and work while meeting the public service
needs of residents and businesses.
Metro Cities supports updates to the LGA formula factors and an increase in the program
appropriation consistent with recommendations by a work group of city associations.
Recommended updates will ensure the LGA program adequately addresses city needs.
3
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
To ensure appropriation levels are adequate to meet program objectives, Metro Cities
supports increasing the LGA appropriation to address cities’ unmet need as defined by the
LGA formula as well as increases in the LGA appropriation to account for inflation.
Metro Cities supported the appropriation increase and updates to the LGA program formula
passed by the 2023 Legislature. Many metropolitan cities do not receive LGA. Future reviews of the LGA program should be conducted every five years or earlier and should consider the needs and capacities of cities not receiving aid under the existing LGA program and formula. Metro Cities supports formula-based allocations for increases to the LGA appropriation,
and opposes freezes of the LGA appropriation, reductions of LGA for balancing state
budget deficits, and diversions of the LGA appropriation to other purposes or entities.
Metro Cities opposes artificial limits or reductions that single out specific cities, and further
opposes using LGA as financial leverage to influence activities and policy decisions at the
local level.
1-F State Property Tax Relief Programs
Metro Cities supports state funded property tax relief programs paid directly to homestead
property taxpayers such as the “circuit breaker” program and enhanced targeting for
special circumstances. Metro Cities also supports the renter’s credit program. Metro Cities
supports an analysis of property tax relief programs to determine their effectiveness and
equity in providing property tax relief to individuals and families across the state.
Metro Cities supports efforts by the Minnesota Department of Revenue to expand outreach
and notification efforts about state property tax relief programs to homeowners, and
notifications to local units of government to support such efforts. Metro Cities also
supports legislative modifications to make tax relief payments to taxpayers automatic.
Metro Cities supports the use of the Department of Revenue’s Voss database to link income
and property values, and the consideration of income relative to property taxes paid in
determining eligibility for state property tax relief programs. Updates to the database should
occur in a timely manner, with data reviewed periodically to ensure the database’s accuracy and
usefulness.
1-G Property Valuation Limits/Limited Market Value.
Metro Cities opposes the use of artificial limits in valuing property at market for taxation
purposes since such limitations shift tax burdens to other classes of property and create
disparities between properties of equal value.
4
2024 Legislative Policies
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
1-H Market Value Homestead Exclusion Program
The Market Value Homestead Exclusion Program (MVHE) provides property tax relief to
qualifying homesteads, through reductions in property tax values, which shifts property taxes
within jurisdictions. The MVHE replaced a former Market Value Homestead Credit Program,
which provided credits on local government tax bills to qualifying properties, with
reimbursements provided by the state to local governments.
Metro Cities opposes restoration of the former Market Value Homestead Credit, as
reimbursements to local governments were inconsistent, and encourages further study of
the exclusion program, with input by city officials, to determine the program’s overall
efficacy and its effects on local tax bases. Due to the recent rapid increase in home values,
Metro Cities supported 2023 modifications to the homestead market value exclusion program to
increase the benefit of the exclusion to qualifying homeowners and will continue to support
future periodic modifications for qualifying homeowners. Changes to the homestead market
value exclusion should be considered in concert with the impact of the homestead credit refund
program.
1-I Metropolitan Area Fiscal Disparities Program
The Metropolitan Area Fiscal Disparities Program, enacted in 1971, was created for the purposes
of:
•providing a way for local governments to share in the resources generated by the growth
of the metropolitan area without removing existing resources;
•promoting orderly development of the region by reducing the impact of fiscal
considerations on the location of business and infrastructure;
•establishing incentives for all parts of the area to work for the growth of the area as a
whole;
•helping communities at various stages of development; and
•encouraging protection of the environment by reducing the impact of fiscal
considerations to ensure protection of parks, open space and wetlands.
Metro Cities supports the Fiscal Disparities Program. Metro Cities opposes any diversion
from the fiscal disparities pool to fund specific state, regional or local programs, goals or
projects as such diversions contradict the purposes of the program.
5
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
Legislation that would modify or impact the fiscal disparities program should only be considered
within a framework of comprehensive reform efforts of the state’s property tax, aids, and credits
system. Any proposed legislation that would modify or impact the fiscal disparities program
must be evaluated utilizing the criteria of fairness, equity, stability, transparency, and coherence
in the treatment of cities and taxpayers across the metropolitan region and must continue to serve
the program’s intended purposes.
Metro Cities opposes legislation that would allow for capturing and pooling growth in
residential tax capacity to fund specific programs or objectives.
Further studies or task forces to consider modifications to the fiscal disparities program must
include participation and input from metropolitan local government representatives.
1-J State Property Tax
The state levies a property tax on commercial/industrial and cabin property. Since cities’ only
source of general funds is the property tax, Metro Cities opposes extension of the state
property tax to additional classes of property. Metro Cities opposes using the state property
tax to fund specific programs or objectives generally funded through state income and sales
tax revenue.
To increase transparency, Metro Cities supports efforts to have the state provide
information on the property tax statement regarding the state property tax. Metro Cities
opposes exempting specific classes of property under the tax as such exemptions shift the
costs of the tax onto other classes of property.
1-K Class Rate Tax System
Metro Cities opposes elimination of the class rate tax system or applying future levy
increases to market value since this further complicates the property tax system.
1-L Regional Facility Host Communities
Municipalities hosting regional facilities such as utilities, landfills or aggregate mining incur
costs and effects such as environmental damage or lost economic development opportunities.
Communities should be compensated for the effects of facilities that provide benefits to the
region and state. Metro Cities supports efforts to offset the negative effects of these facilities
and activities on host communities. Metro Cities would prefer that municipalities be allowed to
collect a host fee that may be adjusted when state decisions affect those fees.
6
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
1-M Sales Tax on Local Government Purchases
Metro Cities supported the 2013 reinstatement of the sales tax exemption for purchases of
goods and services made by cities. This reinstatement does not apply to all local government
purchases.
To ensure citizens receive the full benefit of this exemption, the law should treat purchases of all
local government units the same, including purchases made by special taxing districts, joint
powers entities, or any other agency or instrumentality of local government.
Metro Cities supports simplifying the process on the exemption for construction materials
that is complex and cost ineffective or converting the process to a refund program. Metro
Cities supported the law enacted in 2021 that exempts construction materials purchased to
construct public safety facilities from state sales tax.
Metro Cities supports granting an extension of the motor vehicle sales tax exemption to all
municipal vehicles that are used for general city functions and are provided by
governmental entities. Currently, only certain vehicles, including road maintenance vehicles
purchased by townships, and municipal fire trucks and police vehicles not registered for use on
public roads, are exempt from the MVST.
1-N City Revenue Stability and Fund Balance
Metro Cities opposes state attempts to control or restrict city fund balances, or to use city
fund balances as a rationale for reducing state aids or property tax payment delays. These
funds are necessary to maintain fiscal viability, meet unexpected or emergency resource needs,
purchase capital goods and infrastructure, provide adequate cash flow and maintain high level
bond ratings.
1-O Public Employees’ Retirement Association (PERA)
Metro Cities supports employees and cities sharing equally in the cost of necessary
contribution increases and a sixty percent employer/forty percent employee split for the
PERA Police and Fire Plan. Metro Cities also supports state assistance to local
governments to cover contribution burdens placed on cities over and above contribution
increases required by employees. Cities should receive sufficient notice of increases so that
they may take them into account for budgeting purposes.
Metro Cities opposes benefit improvements for active employees or retirees until the
financial health of the PERA General Plan and PERA Police and Fire Plan are restored.
Metro Cities supports modifications to help align PERA contributions and costs, and
reduce the need for additional contribution increases, including a modification of PERA
eligibility guidelines to account for temporary, seasonal, and part-time employment
situations, the use of pro-rated service credit and a comprehensive review of exclusions to
7
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
simplify eligibility guidelines. Further employer contribution rate increases should be avoided
until other cost alignment mechanisms are considered.
Metro Cities supports cities and fire relief associations working together to determine the
best application of State Fire Aid. Flexibility in the application of aid, where combination
departments exist, will ensure that fire services can be provided in the most cost-effective means
possible.
Regarding police pension contributions, Metro Cities supports a proactive review of factors
contributing to the financial status of police and fire pension plans, to ensure that
structural adjustments are considered in conjunction with potential increases in employee
and employer contribution rates. Specifically, an area that could be considered is contractual
overtime impacts on pension levels.
In recent years, the number of public safety employees seeking duty disability determinations
through the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) and making workers’
compensation claims for line-of-duty injuries has accelerated. The current system for processing
and addressing duty disability benefits can be incompatible with the goal of restoring good health
and returning employees to work and the fiscal implications of the increasing number of claims
are unsustainable for employers and, ultimately, taxpayers.
Metro Cities supports efforts by the League of Minnesota Cities and cities to invest resources
into mental and physical injury, education, prevention, and treatment, and to gather empirical
evidence related to the treatability of mental health injuries and provide early treatment.
Metro Cities further supports full state funding for the Public Safety Officer Benefit account that
reimbursees employers for continued health insurance to police officers and firefighters injured
in the line of duty, funding to reimburse local governments for providing paid time off to public
safety employees who experience work related trauma and/or are seeking treatment for a mental
injury, and funding for trauma training, early intervention, and mental health treatment.
Metro Cities supports removing the sunset of the PERA aid that is paid to local units of
government to help address increased employer contribution costs.
1-P State Program Revenue Sources
Metro Cities opposes any attempt by the state to finance programs of statewide value and
significance, that are traditionally funded with state revenues, with local revenue sources
such as municipal utilities or property tax mechanisms. Statewide programs serve
important state goals and objectives and should be financed through traditional state
revenue sources such as the income or sales tax. Metro Cities further opposes substituting
traditionally state funded programs with funding mechanisms that would disparately affect
taxpayers in the metropolitan area. For these reasons, Metro Cities opposed the
metropolitan sales tax for the purposes of funding housing, that was enacted in 2023.
8
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
1-Q Post-Employment Benefits
Metro Cities supported statutory changes that allow local governments to establish trusts
from which to fund post-employment health and life insurance benefits for public
employees, with participation by cities on a strictly voluntary basis, in recognition of
differing local needs and circumstances. Cities should retain the ability to determine the level
of post-employment benefits to employees.
1-R Health Care Insurance Programs
Metro Cities supports legislative efforts to control health insurance costs but opposes
actions that undermine local flexibility to manage rising insurance costs. Metro Cities
encourages a full examination of the rising costs of health care and the impacts on city employers
and employees. Metro Cities also supports a study of the fiscal impacts to both cities and
retirees of pooling retirees separately from active employees.
1-S State Budget Stability
Metro Cities strongly supports a state revenue system that provides for stability, flexibility,
and adequacy in the system, reduces volatility in state revenues and improves the long-
term balance of state revenues and expenditures. Metro Cities supports a statutory budget
reserve minimum that is adequate to manage risks and fluctuations in the state’s tax system
and a cash flow reserve account of sufficient size so that the state can avoid short- term
borrowing to manage cash flow fluctuations.
Metro Cities supports the principle of representative democracy, and strongly opposes
including tax and expenditure limits in the state constitution, as well as new constitutional
amendments, as these limit flexibility by the Legislature and local governments to respond
to unanticipated critical needs, emergencies, or fluctuating economic situations.
Metro Cities also supports an examination of the property tax system and the relationships
between state and local tax bases, with an emphasis on state budget cuts and effects on
property taxes. State budget deficits must be balanced with statewide sources and must not
further reduce funding for property tax relief programs and aids to local governments that result
in local governments bearing more responsibility for the costs of services that belong to the state.
1-T Taxation of Electronic Commerce
Metro Cities supports efforts to develop a streamlined sales and use tax system to simplify
sales and use tax collection and administration by retailers and states. Metro Cities
supports policies that encourage remote retailers to collect and remit state sales taxes in
states that are complying with the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement.
9
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
Metro Cities opposes legislation that allows accommodation intermediaries such as online
travel companies a tax exemption that terminates obligations to pay hotel taxes to state and
local governments, or otherwise restricts legal actions by states and localities.
The Legislature in 2011 clarified that these services are subject to state sales tax. Metro
Cities supports statutory changes to further clarify that all lodging taxes, whether
administered by the state or locally, apply to total charges, including charges for services
provided by accommodation intermediaries.
1-U Payments for Services to Tax Exempt Property
Metro Cities supports city authority to collect payments from tax exempt property owners
to cover costs of services to those entities, similar to statutory authority for special
assessments. Metro Cities opposes legislation that would exempt nonprofit entities from
paying user fees and service charges.
1-V Proceeds from Tax Forfeited Property
Metro Cities supports changes to state laws governing the proceeds for tax forfeited
properties. Currently, counties can recover administrative costs related to a property before
other allocations are made, and the law allows for the county to recoup a percentage of
assessment costs once administrative costs are allocated. The result is often no allocation or a
very low allocation, and usually insufficient level of proceeds available for covering special
assessments, unpaid taxes, and fees to cities. State processes addressing tax-forfeited properties
can have implications for local land use plans and requirements and can result in unexpected and
significant fiscal impacts on local communities. The current process also does not require the
repayment of unpaid utility charges or building and development fees.
Metro Cities supports statutory changes that balance repayment of unpaid taxes and
assessments, utility charges and other fees and that more equitably allocates the
distribution of proceeds between counties and cities.
1-W Deputy Registrars
In 2019, state officials elected to replace the MNLARS system with the Vehicle Title and
Registration System (VTRS), also known as MNDRIVE. A 2022 Independent Expert Review
found that the MNDRIVE system has increased overall reliability and accuracy across the driver and vehicle services ecosystem, but that deputy registrars are still experiencing difficulties that threaten their continued viability. Specifically, the transition to MNDRIVE has meant that more work is being done at service point counters and more staff time is being spent with customers.
At the same time, simpler transactions have moved online.
10
Municipal Revenue & Taxation
2024 Legislative Policies
Some registrar offices have relied on other local revenues, such as the property tax, to manage normal expenses due to unresolved glitches in the system and a shift from the state to the local
level for additional processing time. These challenges have also created a high potential for
negative public perceptions on local government services, on an issue over which local governments have no ability to control.
Metro Cities supports state funding to compensate local deputy registrars for unanticipated, increased costs associated with the MNDRIVE system, and the shifting of
per-transaction processing burdens that may result from the implementation of MNDRIVE.
As the state works to identify efficiencies in the vehicle registration process and system, policy makers must consider the effects of changes on the financial viability of deputy registrars resulting from decreases in transaction fees collected by local registrars. The perspectives from
local deputy registrars should have increased weight in discussions regarding future MNDRIVE
system enhancements.
Metro Cities supports increases to existing transaction fee levels that are set by state law, to ensure that local deputy registrars can sufficiently function and meet continually evolving local registrar service needs and address any necessary modifications to registrar
operations to ensure these services can be provided safely to the public. Metro Cities further supports sharing revenue from mail-in and online transactions between Driver and Vehicle Services (DVS) and deputy registrars.
1-X Special Assessments
When property owners challenge special assessments based on application of the special benefit
test, some courts have interpreted “benefits received” to mean the one-year increase in property
value that is directly attributable to a construction project. There is currently no consistency
between state laws and rulings by some courts on the term “benefits received”. Metro Cities
supports modifications to state laws governing special assessments for construction projects
or other improvements arising from legislative authority to clarify the definition of
“benefits received”. The modified definition should more closely align with how special
assessments are calculated and recognizes that the benefit of the improvement to a property may
be realized over time and not within one year.
11
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
2-A Mandates, Zoning & Local Authority
To serve their local citizens and communities, city officials must have sufficient local control and
decision-making authority. Metro Cities supports local decision-making authority and
opposes statutory changes that erode local authority and decision making.
Minn. Stat. § 462.357, subd. 1, provide cities authority to regulate and set local ordinances for
zoning. Metro Cities supports existing state laws that provide for this authority.
Metro Cities supports statutory changes that give local officials greater authority to
approve or deny variances to allow flexibility in responding to the needs of the community.
Metro Cities also supports the removal of statutory barriers to uniform zoning ordinance
amendment processes for all cities, regardless of city size classification.
Metro Cities opposes the imposition of legislative mandates that increase local costs without
a corresponding state appropriation or funding mechanism. Unfunded mandates potentially
increase property taxes and impede cities’ ability to fund traditional service needs.
To allow for greater collaboration and flexibility in providing local services, Metro Cities
encourages the removal of barriers to coordination between cities and other units of government
or entities.
2-B City Enterprise Activities
Creation of an enterprise operation allows a city to provide a desired service while maintaining
financial and management control. The state should refrain from infringing on this ability to
provide and manage services for the benefit of a local community and residents.
Metro Cities supports cities having authority to establish city enterprise operations in
response to community needs, local preferences, or state mandates, or that help ensure
residents’ quality of life.
2-C Weapons on City Property
Cities should be allowed to prohibit handguns and other weapons in city-owned buildings,
facilities, and parks and to determine whether to allow permit-holders to bring guns into
municipal buildings, liquor stores, city council chambers and city sponsored youth activities. It is
not Metro Cities’ intention for cities to have the authority to prohibit legal weapons in parking
lots, on city streets, city sidewalks or on locally approved hunting land.
Metro Cities supports local control to prohibit or restrict the possession of dangerous weapons, ammunition, or explosives on local government-owned or leased buildings and land.
12
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
2-D 911 Telephone Tax
Public safety answering points (PSAPs) must be able to continue to rely on state 911 revenues to
pay for upgrades and modifications to local 911 systems, maintenance and operational support,
and dispatcher training.
Metro Cities supports state funding for technology and training necessary to provide the
number and location of wireless and voice over internet protocol (VoIP) calls to 911 on
computer screens and transmit that data to police, fire and first responders.
2-E 800 MHz Radio System
Metro Cities urges the Legislature to provide cities with the financial means to obtain required
infrastructure and subscriber equipment (portable and mobile radios) as well as provide funding
for operating costs, since the prime purpose of this system is to allow public safety agencies and
other units of government the ability to communicate effectively.
Metro Cities supports the work of the Metropolitan Emergency Services Board (previously
the Metropolitan Radio Board) in implementing and maintaining the 800 MHz radio
system so long as cities are not forced to modify their current systems or become a part of
the 800 MHz Radio System unless they so choose.
2-F Building Codes
Thousands of new housing units as well as commercial and industrial buildings are constructed
annually in the metropolitan area. The State Building Code (SBC) sets statewide standards for
the construction, reconstruction, alteration, and repair of buildings and other structures governed
by the code. A building code provides many benefits, including uniformity of construction
standards in the building industry, consistency in code interpretation and enforcement, and life-
safety guidance.
Metro Cities supports an equitable distribution of fees from the Construction Code Fund,
with proportional distribution based on the area of enforcement where fees were received.
Metro Cities further supports efforts by the state, cities, and builders to collectively identify
appropriate uses for the fund, including education, analysis of new materials and
construction techniques, building code updating, building inspector training, and
development of performance standards and identification of construction “best practices.”
Metro Cities supports including the International Green Construction Code as an optional
appendix to the State Building Code to allow cities to utilize appropriate parts of those
guidelines in their communities. Metro Cities also supports adopting the international
13
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
energy conservation code to the state building code without amendments. Metro Cities does
not support legislative solutions that fail to recognize the interrelationships among builders,
state building codes and cities.
Metro Cities supports efforts to increase awareness of the potential impacts and benefits of
requiring sprinklers in new homes and townhouses. Metro Cities supports discussion and
the dissemination of information on these impacts via the code adoption process through
the Department of Labor and Industry. Metro Cities supports adopting and amending the
State Building Code through the rulemaking process and opposes legislative changes to
building codes absent unusual or extraordinary circumstances.
As energy costs continue to rise, more attention must be paid to the poor energy efficiency of
much of the existing housing stock as well as commercial and industrial buildings. Homes and
other buildings that are energy inefficient are more costly to maintain and create added cost to
ownership and occupancy. Making homes and buildings more energy efficient will make them
more affordable to operate and will help the state achieve energy demand goals and will reduce
greenhouse gas emissions. This includes supporting legislation to increase the efficiency of
buildings on a pathway toward net zero energy.
Metro Cities supports state funding and technical support for programs that provide
support for property owners for weatherization and energy efficiency improvements,
including programs available for local governments.
While a single set of coordinated codes helps provide consistency in code administration and
enforcement, implementation of sustainable building design, construction, and operation does
not readily integrate with the existing state building and energy code system. As a result, many
cities are interested in adopting stronger local standards for sustainable development and
conservation.
Metro Cities supports authorizing cities to employ stronger local standards for sustainable
development and conservation that will help inform the state code development process.
The state should include an optional sustainable appendix to the State Building Code to
allow cities to utilize appropriate parts of guidelines in their communities. Metro Cities also
supports the state adopting an advanced energy building standard for buildings within the
State Building Code and allowing cities to adopt their own enhanced standards.
2-G Administrative Fines
Administrative fines can be used to moderate local costs associated with traditional methods of
citation, enforcement, and prosecution. Metro Cities supports the administrative fine
authority that allows cities to issue administrative fines for defined local traffic offenses
and supports further modifications to enhance functionality of this authority. Metro Cities
continues to support cities’ authority to use administrative fines for regulatory ordinances
14
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
such as building codes, zoning codes, health codes, and public safety and nuisance
ordinances.
Metro Cities supports the use of city administrative fines, at a minimum, for regulatory
matters that are not duplicative of misdemeanor or higher-level state traffic and criminal
offenses. Metro Cities also endorses a fair hearing process before a disinterested third party.
2-H Residential Programs
Sufficient funding and oversight is needed to ensure that residents living in residential programs
have appropriate care and supervision and that neighborhoods are not disproportionately
impacted by high concentrations of residential programs. Historically, federal and state laws have
discouraged the concentration of residential group homes so as not to promote areas that
reinforce institutional quality settings.
Under current law, operators of certain residential programs are not required to notify cities when
they intend to purchase single-family housing for this purpose. Cities do not have the authority to
regulate the locations of residential programs. Cities have reasonable concerns about high
concentrations of these facilities in residential neighborhoods, and additional traffic and service
deliveries surrounding these facilities when they are grouped closely together. Municipalities
recognize and support the services residential programs provide. However, cities also have an
interest in preserving balance between residential programs and other uses in residential
neighborhoods.
Providers applying to operate residential programs should be required to notify the city when
applying for licensure to be informed of local ordinance requirements as a part of the application
process. Licensing agencies should be required to notify the city of properties receiving licensure
to be operated as residential programs.
Metro Cities supports changes to Minn. Stat. § 245A.11, subd. 4, to allow for appropriate
non-concentration standards for all types of cities to prevent clustering. Metro Cities
supports statutory modifications to require licensed agencies and licensed providers that
operate residential programs to notify the city of properties being operated as residential
programs. Metro Cities also supports the establishment of appropriate non-concentration
standards for residential programs, to prevent clustering, and supports enforcement of
these rules by the appropriate county agencies.
2-I Annexation
Attempts have been made in recent years to reduce tensions between cities and townships in
annexations. A Municipal Boundary Adjustment Task Force worked to develop recommendations
regarding best practices annexation training for city and township officials to better communicate
and jointly plan potential annexations. While the task force defined differences between cities
and townships, no significant advancements were made in creating best practices.
15
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
Metro Cities supports continued legislative efforts to develop recommendations regarding
best practices and annexation training for city and township officials to better
communicate and plan for potential annexations. Further, Metro Cities supports
substantive changes to the state's annexation laws that will lead to better land use planning,
energy conservation, greater environmental protection, fairer tax bases, clarification of fee
reimbursement and fewer conflicts between townships and cities. Metro Cities also
supports technical annexation changes that are agreed to by cities and townships.
2-J Statewide Funding Sources for Local Issues with Regional Impact
Many issues including, but not limited to, a metropolitan area groundwater monitoring network,
emerald ash borer management, perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS/PFOS),
and the cleanup of storm-water retention ponds, come with significant local costs, and have
effects that reach beyond municipal boundaries.
Metro Cities supports the availability of statewide funding sources to address local issues
that have regional or statewide significance or are caused by state or regional actions.
Metro Cities opposes any requirement to enact ordinances more restrictive than state law
in exchange for access to these funds.
2-K Urban Forest Management Funding
Urban forests are an essential local infrastructure component. Dutch elm disease, oak wilt
disease, drought, storms, and emerald ash borer threaten public investments in trees and
controlling these issues can be greatly consequential for city budgets. The Minnesota Department
of Natural Resources, through its Urban and Community Forestry program, and the Minnesota
Department of Agriculture, through its Shade Tree and Invasive Species program, have
regulatory authority to direct tree sanitation and control programs. Although these programs
allow for addressing some tree disease, pest, and other problems, funding has been inadequate to
meet the need of cities to build capacity for tree programs and respond to catastrophic problems.
Cities share the goal of the state’s ReLeaf Program – promoting and funding the inventory,
planning, planting, maintenance, and improvement of trees in cities throughout the state. In
addition, economic and environmental gains for storm water management, climate change
mitigation, air quality management, tourism, recreation, and other benefits must be protected
from tree loss. A lack of timely investment in urban forests costs cities significantly more in the
long run.
Metro Cities supports continued funding for state programs to assist cities with building
and increasing capacity for urban forest management, meeting the costs of preparing for,
and responding to, catastrophic urban forest problems and preventing further loss and
increasing canopy coverage. Specifically, direct grants to cities are desperately needed for the
16
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
identification, removal, replacement, and treatment of trees related to management of emerald
ash borer (EAB).
2-L Pollinator Habitat Resources
Recent declines in the abundance of pollinator insects, such as bees and butterflies, have been
identified by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization as a threat to food security,
as these insects are an important method of plant pollination. According to the US Fish and
Wildlife Service, the main threats facing pollinators are habitat loss, degradation and
fragmentation. Pollinators lose food and nesting sites they need to survive when native
vegetation is replaced by roadways, manicured lawns, crops and non-native gardens. This can
have added detriment to pollinators that migrate. Research has shown that providing these insects
with more habitat can create the conditions for these insect populations to recover. Converting
traditional grass lawns has been identified as way to increase pollinator habitat.
The Minnesota Legislature created the Lawns to Legumes program, which provides grants to
private homeowners to convert traditional lawns to pollinator friendly landscape. The program
also funds demonstration neighborhoods, which are pollinator programs run by local
governments and nonprofit organizations. Metro Cities supports state funding to programs
such as Lawns to Legumes that create pollinator habitat on both public and private lands.
2-M Regulation of Harmful Substances and Products
In metropolitan regions where most cities share boundaries with other cities, local bans of
harmful drugs and substances such as synthetic drugs, which have been found to be dangerous,
do not eliminate access to these products unless all cities take the same regulatory action.
Metro Cities supports statewide regulation and prohibition of products or substances in
circumstances where there is evidence that products present a danger to anyone who uses
them, where there is broad local support for a ban and where corresponding regulatory
issues have regional or statewide significance.
In addition, the Legislature should provide for the regulation of products that are known to
damage water quality, sewer collection, and storm and wastewater treatment systems, not just at
the treatment and infrastructure maintenance levels, but at the consumer and manufacturing
levels, through accurate labeling of products, public education, and recycling and re-use
programs.
2-N Private Well Drilling Restriction Authority
Cities are authorized to enact ordinances that disallow the placement of private wells within city
limits to ensure both water safety and availability for residents and businesses. This authority is
17
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
important for the appropriate management of local water supply conservation efforts. Municipal
water systems are financially dependent upon users to operate and maintain the system. A loss of
significant rate payers resulting from unregulated private well drilling would economically
destabilize water systems and could lead to contamination of the water supply.
Metro Cities supports current law authorizing cities to regulate and prohibit the placement
of private wells within municipal utility service boundaries and opposes any attempt to
remove or alter that authority. Metro Cities supports funding that can be used to cap
private wells.
2-O Organized Waste Collection
Cities over 1,000 in population are required by law to ensure all residents have solid waste
collection available to them. A city can meet the statutory requirement by licensing haulers to
operate in an open collection system, authorize city employees to collect waste, or implement
organized collection through one or multiple haulers to increase efficiency, reduce truck traffic
and control costs to residents.
Metro Cities supports current laws that allow cities to work with existing haulers to achieve
the benefits of organized collection or investigate the merits of organized collection without
the pressure of a rigid timeline and requirement to pass ‘an intent to organize’ at the
beginning of the discussion process. Metro Cities opposes any legislation that would further
increase the cost or further complicate the process cities are required to follow to organize
waste collection or prohibit cities from implementing, expanding or using organized waste
collection. Metro Cities supports state funding to local governments to increase the
availability of material and organic recycling.
2-P Election Administration
Cities play a critical role in managing and ensuring the integrity of elections. Any changes made
to election laws should not place undue financial or administrative burdens on local
governments. Metro Cities supports reimbursement by the state to local units of
government for any costs associated with changes to election laws.
State laws that allow the filling of municipal vacancies by special election on one of four days
specified in law, can create logistical and financial challenges for municipalities. Metro Cities
supports changes to state laws that allow sufficient flexibility for municipalities in
addressing vacancies in municipal offices.
Metro Cities supports laws to increase efficiencies in administering absentee ballots and
early voting, to reduce the potential for errors, and to improve absentee balloting and early
voting processes.
Metro Cities further supports:
18
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
•Laws allowing in-person absentee voters to place their ballots in a secure tabulator,and statutory changes to allow this for the duration of absentee voting.
•Establishing an earlier deadline for ending in-person absentee voting.
•Revising absentee ballot regulations to allow any person 18 and older to witness theabsentee process and sign the envelope as a witness.
•Authorizing cities with health care facilities to schedule election judges to conductabsentee voting at an earlier date in health care facilities.
•Additional funding and flexibility for cities that administer absentee balloting and
early voting given the extended early voting period and required hours of operationduring evenings and weekends.
2-Q Utility Franchise Fees, Accountability and Cost Transparency
Minnesota cities are authorized by Minn. Stat. 216B and Minn. Stat. § 301B.01 to require a
public utility (gas or electric) that provides services to the city or occupies the public right of
way within a city to obtain a franchise. Several metro area cities have entered agreements that
require the utility to pay a fee to help offset costs of maintaining the right of way.
Cities are also adopting energy policies that use renewable energy resources to light or heat
public facilities. Policies and programs have also been instituted in cooperation with the public
utility franchisee to increase energy efficiency for all users. Cities also contract, at city expense,
with public utilities to “underground” wires. State laws also require energy companies to provide
more electric energy from renewable sources. The specific amounts vary by type of utility.
Metro Cities supports state policies adopted by legislation or through rules of the Public
Utility Commission that provide cities with the authority to include city energy policies and
priorities in a franchise or similar agreement with a franchisee.
Metro Cities supports greater accountability and transparency for city paid costs
associated with underground utility and similar work performed by electric utilities as part
of a local project.
2-R Water Supply
Municipal water suppliers are charged with meeting the water supply needs of their communities
and work to do so with safe, reliable, and cost-effective systems that are sustainable both for
established cities and for all future growth.
The aquifers in the metropolitan area cross municipal boundaries and therefore require a
coordinated regional approach to planning for their future availability. Currently, approximately
19
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
75% of municipal water supply in the metropolitan area comes from groundwater. With proper
management of the resource, the current water supply in the region is adequate; however,
Metropolitan Council projections predict localized declines in aquifer availability due to
population growth estimates if current usage levels are maintained.
Regulation of water is complex and compartmentalized. Various agencies permit its use, plan for
its availability, regulate stormwater, treat wastewater and protect the safety of water. To ensure
that water supply remains adequate and sustainable across the region, we must understand how
much water can be sustainably drawn from the aquifers and what effect increases in re-use,
conservation and recharge can have on the sustainability and availability of both groundwater
and surface water. Many of these strategies cross agency jurisdictions and will require improved
coordination and cooperation.
Municipal water suppliers have made significant infrastructure investments in their systems
based on calculated water availability and DNR permits. Proposals to reduce the reliance on
groundwater by switching municipal water systems from groundwater to surface water supplies
will come with significant costs that could place excessive burdens on local resources.
The outcomes and benefits of re-balancing the mix of groundwater and surface water use for
specific municipalities and the region must be identifiable before any projects are undertaken.
The sustainability of our water supply is an issue of regional and statewide significance and the
expense of any necessary projects that benefit the region should not fall on individual cities. Any
attempts to address water supply sustainability must also take into account all water users,
including municipal water suppliers, industry, private wells, agriculture and contamination
containment.
The metropolitan region must consider the effects of groundwater use beyond the borders of the
metropolitan area on the region’s groundwater availability and the cost of treating contaminants
in surface water that comes into the metropolitan area for use.
Metro Cities supports the removal of barriers to wastewater and storm water re-use,
improved inter-agency coordination, clarifying the appropriate roles of local, regional and
state governments with respect to water, streamlining and consolidating permit approval
processes and the availability of statewide resources to plan for and ensure the future
sustainability of water supply in the metropolitan area. Metro Cities also encourages the
Metropolitan Council, in consultation with municipalities, to find ways to re-use wastewater and
to develop other strategies to improve conservation.
Metro Cities supports state funding for costs associated with converting water supply from
groundwater to surface water and funds to encourage and promote water conservation as a
strategy to improve water sustainability and to improve and protect water quality.
20
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
2-S Regulation of Massage Therapists
In the absence of statewide regulation for massage therapy practitioners, many cities have
enacted local ordinances that require massage therapists to obtain a local professional license to
assist law enforcement in differentiating between legitimate providers and illegitimate businesses
fronting as massage therapy establishments.
Metro Cities supports statewide registration or licensure of massage therapists to aid local
law enforcement efforts in this area. Metro Cities supports cities’ ability to continue to
license massage therapy businesses.
2-T Peace Officer Arbitration Reform
Many municipalities in the metropolitan area provide law enforcement services and employ
licensed peace officers. To ensure the public’s safety and trust, and to strengthen collaboration
between citizens and peace officers, cities must have the authority to effectively govern local law
enforcement agencies. City officials are ultimately responsible for the safety and protection of
the local community.
Metro Cities supports statutory arbitration reforms to allow for the discipline, including
removal, of law enforcement officers who have been found to have violated local law
enforcement agency policies.
Metro Cities further supports a reasonable standard of review in law enforcement
arbitration cases, which would limit the determination of arbitrators to whether the actions
of an employer were reasonable and consistent with city and agency policies. Metro Cities
further supports using administrative law judges (ALJs) or arbitration to address
grievances and discipline related to police misconduct.
2-U Public Safety Training and Resources
Metro Cities acknowledges that the tasks public safety responders have been asked to address are
increasingly the result of inadequate social services and programs. Metro Cities recognizes the
need for adequate resources for social service and mental health services and programs to help
reduce the need for public safety responders to perform these services.
Metro Cities supports ongoing state funding for public safety responders training,
including training for crisis management, cultural awareness and implicit bias, mental
health and de-escalation, and supports ongoing funding for equipment such as body
cameras.
Metro Cities supports ongoing state funding for public safety innovation at the local level.
This could include funding for imbedded social workers or mental health crisis response.
21
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
Metro Cities supports resources for the MN Department of Public Safety to acquire and
store with a third-party vendor anti-scale fencing, pedestrian doors, and vehicle gates for
local government facilities to improve equitable access to these de-escalation and safety
tools.
2-V Race Equity
In the seven-county metropolitan region, people of color represent 28% of the population, and
this percentage is expected to grow to 44% by 2050, according to the current population forecast
from the Metropolitan Council. As racial and ethnic diversity increases in the region, people of
color continue to experience significant barriers in housing, employment, criminal justice, public
infrastructure, health, and education, and disparities are becoming more apparent.
Across the metropolitan region, many cities are working to examine local policies and systems,
to revise the delivery of public services, and to allocate resources to help advance race equity. All
levels of government as well as the nonprofit and business sectors have roles to play in
addressing race inequities and must work collaboratively to ensure that services and resources
are considered, designed and implemented in a comprehensive, purposeful, informed and
inclusive way to achieve race equity.
Metro Cities supports:
•An examination and revision of existing state, regional, county and city laws, ordinances
and policies to address racial disparities.
•State, regional, county and city resources to assist with comprehensive data collection,
disaggregation and sharing to ensure informed policy and funding decisions at all levels
of government.
•Funding to assist in the development of tools and resources that advance racially
equitable outcomes.
•Activating partnerships among state, regional, and local governmental institutions and
other entities to advance race equity.
2-W Street Racing
Street racing is an issue of increasing concern for cities across the metropolitan region. This
activity is highly mobile, is strongly associated with other illegal activity and poses significant
public safety risks for participants, third-party observers, and the general public.
Metro Cities supports modifications to state laws to prohibit street racing and activities
associated with promoting and undertaking the activity of street racing. Specifically, Metro
22
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
Cities supports statutory changes that address the activity and associated risks posed by
street racing, sliding, and drifting. These could include penalties such as license suspension,
minimum impoundment periods, and vehicle forfeiture.
Metro Cities supports state funding to help prevent and respond to street racing activity.
This could include funding for State Patrol air supports and funding for costs, including
overtime, associated with targeted law enforcement saturations and Toward Zero Deaths
initiatives. Metro Cities also supports state resources to increase the Bureau of Criminal
Apprehension’s intelligence gathering capabilities and to enhance existing coordination
efforts among law enforcement agencies.
Metro Cities further recognizes the importance and value of diversion programs that
emphasize behavior modifications, which can help curb illegal activity and minimize
recidivism.
2-X Carjacking
The crime of carjacking has increased significantly in the metropolitan region, with serious
consequences for individual and community public safety.
Metro Cities supports the consideration by the Legislature of statutory changes to address
the severity of this crime. This includes state funding to help state and local law
enforcement agencies prevent and respond to carjacking. This could include funding for
State Patrol air supports and for costs, including overtime, associated with targeted law
enforcement saturations. Metro Cities also supports state resources to increase the Bureau
of Criminal Apprehension’s intelligence gathering capabilities and to enhance existing
coordination efforts among law enforcement agencies.
Metro Cities further recognizes the importance and value of diversion programs that
emphasize behavior modifications, which can help curb illegal activity and minimize
recidivism.
Metro Cities supports consumer protection efforts that require motor vehicle
manufacturers to offer antitheft protection devices on certain vehicles that have been
shown to be especially susceptible to theft.
2-NEW Adult-Use Cannabis
The Minnesota Legislature legalized adult-use cannabis in 2023. The law establishes the Office
of Cannabis Management, which will be responsible for licensing cannabis businesses and
regulating the industry. The law includes a local registration process for cannabis business
license holders where local governments are authorized to charge a registration and renewal fee.
Responsible local governments are required to conduct compliance checks at cannabis
businesses. Cities are authorized to establish, own, and operate a municipal cannabis store. The
23
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
law also includes an optional, population-based limit on the number of retail locations in each
city or county. It is vital that local governments retain the ability to suspend retail registrations
for businesses that pose an immediate threat to public health or safety.
The law permits local units of government to establish reasonable restrictions on the time, place,
and manner of cannabis business operations and includes a zoning compliance requirement for
businesses where a local jurisdiction certifies that a business’ plans are appropriate and in line
with local requirements.
The law establishes a Local Cannabis Aid Account to provide aid to cities and counties. The
account will receive 20% of the of the revenue from the 10% gross receipts tax on cannabis
products. Half of the local cannabis aid will go to counties and half will be distributed to cities
based on the number of businesses located in each city.
Metro Cities opposes any efforts to reduce cities’ local control and zoning authority related
to cannabis. Metro Cities supports legislation providing cities the ability to prohibit
cannabis businesses within their jurisdiction.
Metro Cities expects the Office of Cannabis Management to work closely with cities as this
legislation is fully implemented. This includes working with local governments to create
model ordinances and providing technical assistance on cannabis-related issues.
Metro Cities supports the ongoing evaluation of costs associated with the legalization of
adult-use cannabis. Funding should be made available to cities without cannabis businesses
if such studies show that those communities face additional budgetary pressures because of
cannabis legalization.
Metro Cities supports the distribution of tax revenue from adult-use cannabis sales to cities
based on the number of products sold and not the number of stores located in each
municipality.
2-NEW Emergency Medical Services
The Emergency Medical Services Regulatory Board (EMSRB) is the state regulatory entity that oversees and issues ambulance licenses and also has authority to designate exclusive emergency
medical services (EMS) operating areas, or primary service areas (PSAs), for ambulance providers. Once a provider has been approved to operate in a PSA, the provider is authorized to serve the area for an indefinite period of time. Currently, no other state health licensing board grants providers an exclusive operating area.
Health licensing boards play a critical role in setting professional standards and credentialing
processes. However, the EMSRB has not imposed operational standards to ensure an area has adequate coverage and service levels such as response time requirements. Nor is there state oversight of ambulance billing rates. The current system does not require ambulance services to disclose the number of ambulances staffed, where an ambulance is responding from or any other important data points that would ensure a community is receiving quality ambulance services.
24
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
The lack of transparency within Minnesota’s ambulance industry compromises accountability by
EMS providers.
Metro Cities supports allowing local units of government to designate which licensed ambulance service provider(s) serve their community and to determine the appropriate level of service. Metro Cities further supports additional tools and local authority that ensure transparency by EMS providers.
Metro Cities supports decoupling the professional standards overview role from the service area determination. Metro Cities additionally supports regional balance in the membership of the EMSRB and a requirement that includes representatives of municipal ambulance services on the EMSRB. The EMSRB should be required to submit biennial reports on
EMS service delivery data points for all local governments, to appropriate legislative
committees.
2-NEW Copper and Other Metal Theft
Wire theft from streetlights, other public infrastructure, and private property negatively impacts
communities, by reducing public safety for all transportation modes. These thefts also cost cities
hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to replace and repair damaged streetlights.
Metro Cities supports efforts to curtail the theft of copper wires from public infrastructure
and private property. Metro Cities supports statutory changes that would require
appropriate controls on the purchase and sale of scrap copper and other metals.
2-NEW Open Meeting Law
Public meetings in the State of Minnesota, including city council meetings and local boards and
commissions, must be conducted in accordance with the Open Meeting Law under Minnesota
Statute 13D. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, cities successfully pivoted to working
remotely while maintaining and even increasing transparency and accessibility.
Metro Cities supports amending the Open Meeting Law to allow city councilmembers and
city board and/or commission members the ability to participate remotely in up to fifty
percent of scheduled meetings each year without making their location open and accessible
to the public as otherwise required under Minn. Stat. § 13D.02, subd. 1. Metro Cities also
supports amending the Open Meeting Law to the remove the three-times-per-year cap for
medical and military exceptions.
25
General Government
2024 Legislative Policies
2-NEW School Resource Officers
In 2023, the Legislature included provisions in the omnibus education bill to limit the use of
force toward students by school resource officers (SROs). The law has generated conflicting
legal interpretations and created ambiguity for SROs on when use of certain restraints is
authorized in school settings, and whether SROs retain the authority to use reasonable force, as
provided by Minnesota Statutes 609.06.
Due to these ambiguities and potential civil and criminal liability risks, some local law
enforcement agencies suspended or terminated SRO contracts with school districts. Although
two opinions released by the Attorney General make the law clearer, it is possible that these
opinions could be challenged, and result in legal consequences for SROs and their employers.
Metro Cities supports the Legislature and Governor working with stakeholders, including
law enforcement, local government, and education organizations, to clarify laws pertaining
to the authority SROs have in schools.
26
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
3-A to 3-J: Introduction
While the provision of housing is predominantly a private sector, market-driven activity, all
levels of government – federal, state, regional and local – have a role in facilitating the
production and preservation of affordable housing in Minnesota.
Adequate affordable housing is a significant concern for the metropolitan region and effective
approaches require participation from all levels of government, the private sector, and nonprofit
groups.
3-A City Role in Housing
Cities in Minnesota are responsible for most ground-level housing policy, including land use
planning, code enforcement, rental licensing, and often the packaging of multi-level financial
incentives. Cities are responsible for ensuring local health and safety and the structural
soundness and livability of the local housing stock through building permits and inspections.
Cities are charged with providing public infrastructure to serve current and future residents and
must assess the effects of a new development on parks, local roads, water, sanitary sewer, and
stormwater capacities to ensure that additional needs for infrastructure are assumed by the new
development and not current taxpayers. It is the city that assumes the future financial
responsibility, management, and maintenance for improvements and infrastructure after a
developer has completed a project.
It is also the responsibility of cities to periodically review local requirements such as land use
regulations and ordinances, and make long range plans consistent with state statute, to ensure
that they are consistent with these purposes. While local government financial resources
constitute a relatively small portion of the total costs of providing housing, many cities take on a
significant administrative burden by providing financial incentives and regulatory relief,
participating in state and regional housing programs, and supporting either local or countywide
housing and redevelopment authorities and community development agencies.
When a developer seeks to advance a development proposal that does not meet straight housing
and mixed-use zoning codes and requirements, the developer may request a planned unit
development (PUD) agreement with a city. PUDs, where appropriate, can provide zoning
flexibility to develop a site that is otherwise not permitted by a city code. The use of PUDs may
allow for more variety and creativity in land uses, increased density on a site, internal transfers of
density, construction phasing, reduced setbacks, and a potential for lower development costs.
In the interest of adhering to local long-range plans and managing local health, safety, viability,
and welfare needs, a city may request certain public benefits from a developer, including but not
limited to additional open space, preservation of wooded land and environmentally sensitive
areas, landscaping along major roadways, providing a mix of housing types, and enhanced
design and landscaping features. Cities may also provide a developer with credit for investments
27
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
in public infrastructure greater than would be minimally required, including water, sanitary
sewer, stormwater, or road infrastructure.
Metro Cities strongly opposes any effort to reduce, alter or interfere with cities’ authority
to carry out these functions in a locally determined manner.
Metro Cities supports exceptions to the land use timelines in Minn. Stat. § 15.99 in the
event of extenuating local and state circumstances. Metro Cities supports local authority
determination when exercising the use of exceptions, recognizing projects may be in
different stages of approval. If a state of emergency limits the ability of city staff to
complete a land use review, it should not result in de facto approval of an application.
3-B City Role in Affordable and Life Cycle Housing
Metro Cities supports housing that is affordable and appropriate for people at all stages of
life. A variety of housing opportunities are important to the economic and social well-being of
local communities and the metropolitan region. The region faces challenges in meeting the
existing and future housing needs of low and moderate-income residents. Existing housing stock
is aging, with over half older than 40 years old, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. Older
housing stock can be more affordable; however, it requires investments to remain viable.
Private investors have purchased subsidized and unsubsidized rental units, made improvements,
and charged higher rents that have made access to previously affordable units prohibitive for low
and moderate-income residents. This investor ownership has converted owner-occupied houses
to rental houses, which has impacted the ability of lower-income renters to become homeowners
and build wealth. Neighbors and cities have seen a lack of investment in these rental homes that
has led to the deterioration of the housing stock.
The Metropolitan Council has projected the region will add nearly 60,845 households earning up
to 50 percent area median income between 2020 and 2030 that will need affordable housing.
Senior households bring the number of low-income households up significantly, with the number
of age 65+ households growing by 51,691 during that time-period.
Cities should work with the private and nonprofit sectors, counties, state agencies and the
Metropolitan Council to ensure the best use of new and existing tools and resources to produce
new housing and preserve existing affordable housing. Cities can facilitate the production and
preservation of affordable and life cycle housing by:
•Applying for funding from available grant and loan programs;
•Using city and county funds to support affordable housing. This can include creating a local
or regional housing trust fund to support affordable housing;
•Providing information, encouraging and incentivizing participation in the Section 8 Housing
Choice Voucher program to landlords;
28
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
•Working with developers and residents to blend affordable housing into new and existing
neighborhoods, including locations with access to amenities and services;
•Working with the state and Metropolitan Council to recognize the relationship between
housing and mobility options, including transit and pedestrian routes;
•Periodically examining local requirements, policies and review processes to determine their
impacts on the construction of affordable housing;
•Considering criteria under which a city may change its fee structure in support of additional
affordable housing;
•Supporting housing options that meet a city’s current and future demographics, including
family size, age, mobility, and ability levels;
•Supporting housing design that is flexible, accessible and usable for residents with varied
abilities at multiple stages of life;
•Supporting housing with supportive services for people with disabilities;
•Employing innovative strategies to advance affordable housing needs such as public- private
partnerships or creative packaging of regulatory relief and incentives;
•Using available regulatory mechanisms to shape housing communities;
•Recognizing the inventory of subsidized and unsubsidized (naturally occurring) affordable
housing, and working collaboratively with buyers and sellers of naturally occurring
affordable housing to retain affordability;
•Tracking the impacts on the housing market of investor-owned homes and enacting local
strategies and policies that support home purchases by owners who reside in the homes;
•Supporting policy solutions that provide cities with tools to mitigate any negative impacts on
city housing stock and prospective homebuyers due to investor-owned purchasing of homes.
3-C Inclusionary Housing
While Metro Cities believes there are cost savings to be achieved through regulatory reform,
density bonuses as determined by local communities, and fee waivers, Metro Cities does not
believe a mandatory inclusionary housing approach can achieve desired levels of affordability
solely through these steps. Several cities have established local inclusionary housing policies, in
some cases requiring the creation of affordable units if the housing development uses public
29
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
financial assistance or connecting the policy to zoning and land use changes. The Metropolitan
Council, in distributing the regional allocation of housing need, must recognize both the
opportunities and financial limitations of cities. The Council should partner with cities to
facilitate the creation of affordable housing through direct financial assistance and/or advocating
for additional resources through the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency.
Metro Cities supports the location of affordable housing in residential and mixed-use
neighborhoods throughout a city. Metro Cities supports a city’s authority to enact its own
inclusionary housing policy. However, Metro Cities does not support passage of a
mandatory inclusionary housing state law imposed on local governments that would
require a certain percentage of units in all new housing developments to be affordable to
households at specific income levels.
3-D Metropolitan Council Role in Housing
The Metropolitan Council is statutorily required to assist cities with meeting the provisions of the
Land Use Planning Act (LUPA) under Minn. Stat. § 473. The LUPA requires cities to adopt
sufficient standards, plans and programs to meet their local share of the region’s overall projected
need for low and moderate-income housing. The Council’s responsibilities include the
preparation and adoption of guidelines and procedures to assist local government units with
accomplishing the requirements of the LUPA.
The Metropolitan Council also offers programs and initiatives to create affordable housing
opportunities, including the Livable Communities Act programs and operation of a metropolitan
housing and redevelopment authority.
Unlike parks, transit and wastewater, housing is not a statutory regional system. The
Metropolitan Council’s role, responsibilities and authority are more limited in scope, centered on
assisting local governments by identifying the allocation of need for affordable housing,
projecting regional growth and identifying available tools, resources, technical assistance and
methods that cities can use to create and promote affordable housing opportunities in their
communities.
The Metropolitan Council should work in partnership with local governments to ensure that the
range of housing needs for people at various life cycles and incomes can be met. Metro Cities
opposes the elevation of housing to “Regional System” status. Metro Cities supports
removing the Metropolitan Council’s review and comment authority connected to housing
revenue bonds under Minn. Stat. § 462C.04.
In 2014, the Metropolitan Council released its first housing policy plan in nearly thirty years. A
Metropolitan Council housing policy plan should include defined local, regional, and state roles
for the provision of housing in all sectors, identify the availability of and need for tools and
resources for affordable and life-cycle housing, be explicit in supporting partnerships for the
advocacy for state and federal resources for housing, and encompass policies, best practices, and
30
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
technical guidance for all types of housing. A plan should also recognize the diversity in local
needs, characteristics, and resources.
Metro Cities supports strategies such as regional and sub-regional cooperation and the
sharing of best practices among local governments and other entities and partners to
address the region’s affordable housing needs.
A policy plan should allow for ongoing research and analysis by the Metropolitan Council to
provide communities with timely and updated information on regional and local housing needs
and market trends as regional and local needs change and evolve. Metro Cities supports the
solicitation and use of local data, inputs and analyses and local governments’ review of such
data.
Metro Cities supports continued city representation in any updated or new regional
housing policy plan and other regional housing policy considerations.
3-E Allocation of Affordable Housing Need
The affordable housing need allocation methodology determines the number of needed
affordable housing units for the metropolitan region and distributes the need by assigning each
city its fair share through an affordable housing need number. Minn. Stat. § 473.859 requires
cities to guide sufficient land to accommodate local shares of the region’s affordable housing
need. Metro Cities supports additional Metropolitan Council resources to assist cities in
meeting cities’ share of the region’s affordable housing needs.
Metro Cities supports the creation of a variety of housing opportunities. However, the
provision of affordable and lifecycle housing is a shared responsibility between the private sector
and government at all levels, including the federal government, state government and
Metropolitan Council. Land economics, construction costs, labor costs, and infrastructure needs
create barriers to the creation of affordable housing that cities cannot overcome without
assistance.
Therefore, Metro Cities supports a Metropolitan Council affordable housing policy and
allocation of need methodology that recognizes the following tenets:
•Regional housing policies characterize individual city and sub-regional housing
numbers as a range of needs in the community;
•Cities need significant financial assistance from the federal and state government, as
well as the Metropolitan Council, to make progress toward creating additional
affordable housing and preserving existing affordable housing;
•Metropolitan Council planning and policies must be more closely aligned to help ensure
that resources for transportation and transit are available to assist communities in
addressing their local share of the regional affordable housing need and to ensure that
all populations have adequate mobility to reach jobs, education and other destinations
31
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
regardless of where they live;
•The Metropolitan Council will not hold cities responsible if a city does not meet its
affordable housing need number. However, efforts to produce affordable housing may
be considered when awarding grants;
•The Metropolitan Council, with input by local government representatives, should
examine the allocation of need methodology with respect to the relationship between the
regional allocation and the local share of the need. The formula should also be routinely
evaluated to determine if market conditions have changed or if underlying conditions
should prompt readjustment of the formula;
•The Council should use a methodology that incorporates data accumulated by
individual cities and not limited to census driven or policy driven growth projections;
•The formula should be adjusted to better reflect the balance and breadth of existing
subsidized and naturally occurring affordable housing stocks; and
•The Council should work with local governments through an appeals process in order
to resolve any local issues and concerns with respect to the need allocations and the plan
review process.
3-F Housing Policy and Production Survey
The Metropolitan Council calculates a city’s housing production annually. Production
information is collected through an annual city survey as well as Council data. Cities
participating in Livable Communities are required to include their housing action plan and
ALHOA funding amounts in their survey responses. Beginning in 2022, the Council began
compiling the data in a report to share city practices and funding sources that support the creation
of new affordable housing units.
Metro Cities supports a regular review of the survey questions and use of data, with city
input. Any proposed new, deleted, or expanded uses or programs in which data from the
Housing Policy and Production Survey would be used should be reviewed by local officials
and Metro Cities. Metro Cities supports a consistent schedule for sending the annual
housing production survey to cities.
3-G State Role in Housing
The state must be an active participant in providing funding for housing, including direct
funding, financial incentives, and initiatives to assist local governments and developers to
support affordable housing and housing appropriate for people at all stages of life. State funding
32
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
is a major and necessary component for the provision of housing. Current resource levels are
insufficient to meet the spectrum of needs in the metropolitan region and across the state.
Primarily through programs administered by the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency (MHFA),
the state establishes the general direction and prioritization of housing issues, and financially
supports a variety of housing, including transitional housing, privately and publicly-owned
housing, supportive housing, senior housing, workforce housing, and family housing.
Minnesota’s low-income rental property classification, commonly known as class 4d(1), allows
landlords to certify qualifying low-income rental property. The state must continue to be an
active partner in addressing life cycle and affordable housing needs.
Workforce housing is generally defined as housing that supports economic development and job
growth and is affordable to the local workforce. A statewide program, administered through the
Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, supports workforce homeownership efforts in the
metropolitan area. State policies and funding should recognize that affordable housing options
that are accessible to jobs and meet the needs of a city’s workforce are important to the economic
competitiveness of cities and the metro region. In addition, significant housing related racial
disparities persist in Minnesota, especially as it relates to the percentage of households of color
who pay more than 30 percent of their income in housing costs and as it relates to the significant
disparity gap in homeownership rates.
Metro Cities supports:
•Increased, sustainable and adequate state funding for new and existing programs that
support life cycle, workforce and affordable housing, address homeownership
disparities, address foreclosure mitigation, address housing for families with children,
and support senior, transitional and emergency housing for the metro region;
•An ongoing state match for local and regional housing trust fund investments and local
policies in support of affordable housing. State funds should be issued on a timeline that
works with a city’s budget process;
•Private sector funding for workforce housing;
•Housing programs that assist housing development, preservation and maintenance of
existing housing stock, including unsubsidized, naturally occurring affordable housing
that is affordable to residents throughout the low-to-moderate income range;
•State funded housing assistance programs to help with affordability;
•Housing programs designed to develop market rate housing in census blocks with
emerging or high concentrations of poverty, where the private market might not
otherwise invest, as a means of creating mixed-income communities and reconciling
33
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
affordable housing with community development goals;
•Continuing the policy of using the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency’s investment
earnings for housing programs;
•City input into state legislation and administrative policies regarding distribution of tax
credits and tax-exempt bonding;
•Exemptions from, or reductions to sales, use and transaction taxes applied to the
development and production of affordable housing;
•Consideration of the use of state bond proceeds and other appropriations for land
banking, land trusts, and rehabilitation and construction of affordable housing;
•Programs that help avoid foreclosures, improve homeownership rates and reduce racial
disparities through homeownership assistance programs and counseling services,
including down payment assistance and pre-purchasing counseling to improve financial
wellness and inform homeowner and potential homeowners of their rights, options, and
costs associated with owning a home;
•State tenant protection policies as well as a city’s ability to enact tenant protections to
support access to affordable housing and housing stability for tenants;
•Prohibiting landlords from denying housing opportunities to residents based on their
source of income;
•Housing stability for renters through policies that mitigate the impact of or reduces the
number of evictions filed;
•Policies that encourage public housing authorities and owners of federally assisted
housing to consider a holistic approach to selecting tenants during the application and
screening process, and avoid excluding tenants solely based on criminal records;
•Exploring best practices toward increased housing affordability for residents, housing
maintenance standards and providing quality housing for residents. Cities should work
with rental housing owners and operators when establishing best practices;
•Any program expansion proposals for state mandated class-rate reductions should
include a full analysis of the impacts to local property tax bases before their enactment.
Metro Cities opposes any changes to the 4d(1) program that substantially increases the
tax responsibility for residents and businesses or increases the tax benefit for landlords
without including increased benefits for renters of 4d(1) units. Metro Cities supports a
34
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
property owner being required to receive city approval where the property is located,
for all 4d(1) property that has not in whole or in part been classified as 4d(1) property.
Metro Cities also supports ongoing 4d(1) aid, and lowering the threshold of eligibility
for cities to receive 4d(1) aid. Metro Cities supports the continuation of a reporting
process for landlords benefitting from the 4d(1) class rate reduction to ensure deeper
affordability or property reinvestment, and a sunset period for any changes made to
the program to evaluate the range of impacts that expanding the program may have;
•The state housing tax credit to support local governments and the private sector to help
spur construction and secure additional private investment; and
•Maintaining existing municipal authority to establish a housing improvement area
(HIA). If the Legislature grants multi-jurisdictional entities the authority to create
HIAs, creation of an HIA must require municipal approval.
3-H Federal Role in Affordable and Workforce Housing
Federal funding plays a critical role in aiding states and local governments in their efforts to
maintain and increase affordable and workforce housing. Providing working families access to
housing is an important piece to the economic vitality of the region. Metro Cities encourages the
federal government to maintain and increase current levels of funding for affordable and
workforce housing. Federal investment in affordable and workforce housing will maintain and
increase the supply of affordable and life cycle housing as well as make housing more affordable
through rental assistance programs such as the Section 8 housing choice voucher program.
In July 2015, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) released a final
rule on affirmatively furthering fair housing (AFFH) with an aim to provide communities that
receive HUD funding with clear guidelines to meet their obligation under the Fair Housing Act
of 1968 to promote and reduce barriers to fair housing and equal opportunity. HUD has since
provided new guidance to comply with the AFFH rule.
Metro Cities supports:
•Preserving and increasing funding for the Community Development Block Grant
Program (CDBG) and the federal HOME program that are catalysts for creating and
preserving affordable housing;
•Preserving and increasing resources and incentives to sustain existing public housing
throughout the Metro Area;
35
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
•Maintaining the federal tax credit program to help spur construction and secure
additional private investment, including making the four percent Low Income Housing
Tax Credit a fixed rate as was done with the nine percent credit in 2015;
•Creating and implementing a more streamlined procedural method for local units of
government to participate in and access federal funding and services dealing with
grants, loans, and tax incentive programs for economic and community development
efforts;
•Additional resources to assist communities to meet obligations to reduce barriers to and
promote fair housing and equal opportunity;
•Maintaining and increasing resources to Section 8 funding and to support incentives for
rental property owners to participate in the program;
•Federal funding programs for renters with limited income or fixed income;
•Rental increase caps when the rent increase exceeds a 5-year running average; and
•Federal funding to provide short-term assistance for HRAs to facilitate the sale of tax-
exempt bonds.
3-I Vacant, Boarded, and Foreclosed Properties and Properties at Risk
Abandoned residential and commercial properties can harm communities when vacant buildings
result in reduced property values and increased crime. The additional public safety and code
enforcement costs of managing vacant properties are a financial strain on cities.
Metro Cities supports solutions to vacant and boarded properties that recognize that
prevention is more cost effective than a cure, the causes of this problem are many and
varied, requiring a variety of solutions, and cities must not be expected to bear the bulk of
the burden of mitigation, because it is not simply a “city” problem.
Further, Metro Cities supports:
•Registration of vacant and boarded properties;
•Allowing cities to acquire vacant and boarded properties before deterioration and
vandalism result in unsalvageable structures, including providing financial tools such as
increasing eminent domain flexibility;
•Improving the ability of cities to recoup the increased public safety, management, and
enforcement costs related to vacant properties;
36
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
•Improvement of the redemption process to provide increased notification to renters,
strengthen the ability of homeowners to retain their properties, and reduce the amount
of time a property is vacant;
•Expedition of the tax forfeiture process;
•Increasing financial tools for neighborhood recovery efforts, including tax increment
financing; and
•Year-round notification by utility companies of properties not receiving utility service.
3-J Housing Ordinance Enforcement
A Minnesota State Supreme Court ruling, Morris v. Sax, stated that provisions of the city of
Morris’ rental housing code were invalid because there were subjects dealt with under the state
building code and the city was attempting to regulate these areas “differently from the state
building code.”
Minn. Stat. § 326B.121, subdivision 1 states: “The State Building Code is the standard that
applies statewide for the construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair, and use of buildings and
other structures of the type governed by the code. The State Building Code supersedes the
building code of any municipality.” Subdivision 2 states: “A municipality must not by ordinance,
or through development agreement, require building code provisions regulating components or
systems of any structure that are different from any provision of the State Building Code. This
subdivision does not prohibit a municipality from enacting or enforcing an ordinance requiring
existing components or systems of any structure to be maintained in a safe and sanitary condition
or in good repair, but not exceeding the standards under which the structure was built,
reconstructed, or altered, or the component or system was installed, unless specific retroactive
provisions for existing buildings have been adopted as part of the State Building Code. A
municipality may, with the approval of the state building official, adopt an ordinance that is more
restrictive than the State Building Code where geological conditions warrant a more restrictive
ordinance. A municipality may appeal the disapproval of a more restrictive ordinance to the
commissioner.”
Metro Cities supports the ability of cities to enforce all housing codes passed by a local
municipality to maintain its housing stock.
3-K Economic Development, Redevelopment and Workforce Readiness
The economic viability of the metropolitan area is enhanced by an array of economic
development tools that create infrastructure, revitalize previously developed property, provide
incentives for business development, support technological advances, support a trained
workforce, and address disparities in economic development and workforce development. It
should be the goal of the state to champion development and redevelopment by providing
37
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
adequate and sustainable funding to assure competitiveness in a global marketplace. The state
should recognize the relationship between housing and economic development. Access to
affordable child care supports working families and allows parents to enter or remain in the
workforce. Economic development and redevelopment are not mutually exclusive – some
projects require a boost on both counts. The State of Minnesota should recognize cities as the
primary unit of government responsible for the implementation of economic development,
redevelopment policies, and land use controls.
3-K(1) Economic Development
For purposes of this section, economic development is defined as a form of development that can
contain direct business assistance, infrastructure development, technical assistance, and policy
support with the goal of sustainable job creation, job retention, appropriate state regulation or
classification, or to nurture new or retain existing industry in the state. The measure of return on
investment of public business subsidies should include the impact (positive or negative) of “spin-
off development” or business development that is ancillary and supportive of the primary
business.
A strength of the regional economy is its economic diversity. Multiple industry clusters and
sectors employ a specialized, trained workforce and support entrepreneurs in developing new
businesses. Partnerships and collaborations among the state and local levels of government,
higher education and industry should continue to develop, to commercialize new technologies
and to support efforts to enhance the economic vitality of the region.
While cities are the unit of local government primarily responsible for the implementation of
economic development, counties have an interest in supporting local economic development
efforts. Any creation of a county CDA, EDA or HRA with economic development powers should
follow Minn. Stat. § 469.1082 that requires a city to adopt a resolution electing to participate.
Cities can work with the public and private sectors to support the region’s economic growth by
reducing barriers to economic participation by people of color.
Metro Cities supports state funded programs that support new and expanding businesses,
infrastructure development and public-private partnerships. This includes the Minnesota
Investment Fund, Job Creation Fund and Angel Tax Credit. Programs using statewide funding
should strive to award funds balanced between the metro region and greater Minnesota. Metro
Cities supports competitive funding for statewide grant programs such as the Minnesota
Investment Fund (MIF) as opposed to direct legislative appropriations for projects from
these funds. Metro Cities supports a percentage of MIF loan repayments to cities. The state
should provide administrative support and technical assistance to cities that administer these
programs. Applications for state MIF funds should allow a city to indicate support for a MIF
grant or a loan.
Metro Cities supports economic tools that facilitate job growth without relying solely on the
property tax base; green job development and related innovation and entrepreneurship;
programs to support minority business start-ups; small business financing tools including a
38
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
state new markets tax credit program mirrored on the federal program; tools to attract
and retain data centers and other IT facilities; access to affordable child care; and
maintaining existing municipal authority to establish a special service district (SSD). Metro
Cities supports further study of allowing mixed-use buildings that have both commercial
and residential uses to be included in an SSD.
3-K(2) Redevelopment
Redevelopment facilitates the re-use of previously developed land, thereby leveling the playing
field between greenfield and brownfield sites so that a developer can choose to locate on land
that has already been used.
Redeveloping properties supports community vibrancy and revitalization. Redevelopment
increases the local property tax base, increases land values, provides more efficient use of new or
existing public infrastructure (including public transit), reduces urban sprawl, and enhances the
livability of neighborhoods. Jobs are created three times – at demolition and cleanup, during
construction, and ongoing jobs tied to the new use.
Redevelopment may occur on non-polluted land or on brownfields. Brownfields are abandoned,
idled, or underused industrial and commercial properties where financing or redevelopment is
complicated by actual or suspected environmental contamination. Federal, state, regional and
local governments fund investigation and cleanup of blighted or other brownfield properties that
allows for redevelopment without risking human health or potential environmental liabilities.
Correcting and stabilizing polluted soils and former landfill sites allows cities to redevelop and
reuse properties. For many cities in the metropolitan region, redevelopment is economic
development.
Metro Cities supports increased funding from federal, state and regional sources. The
Metropolitan Council’s Livable Communities Act programs fund redevelopment activities that
support cleanup and tax base revitalization. Metro Cities supports allowing a maximum levy
amount for this program, as provided under law. Metro Cities supports increased and
sustained state funds for DEED-administered programs like the Redevelopment Grant and
Demolition Loan Program, dedicated to metropolitan area projects, innovative Business
Development Public Infrastructure grants, as well as increased, flexible and sustained
funding for the Contamination Cleanup and Investigation Grant Program.
The expansion of transit service throughout the region brings opportunity for redevelopment and
transit-oriented development (TOD). Metro Cities supports financing, regulatory tools and
increased flexibility in the use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to nurture TOD. Metro
Cities supports funding Transit Improvement Areas (TIAs) and ensuring that the eligibility
criteria encourage a range of improvements and infrastructure and accommodate varying
city circumstances and needs.
Metro Cities supports expansion of existing tools or development of new funding
mechanisms to correct unsuitable soils as well as city authority to redevelop land previously
39
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
used as landfills and dumps. If a city receives initial approval from a state regulatory authority,
a city’s redevelopment project approval should be considered final.
Local governments and cities may choose to revitalize historic structures rather than construct
new buildings. Metro Cities supports extension of the sunset of the state income tax credit
and maintaining the federal tax credit for preservation of historic properties. Metro Cities
supports collection of the state refund for the historic expenditures over one year.
The COVID-19 pandemic changed the way Americans work. As more employees are working
from home on a full-time or hybrid basis, more and more employers are downsizing their office
spaces. As a result of this national trend, cities are experiencing significant commercial vacancy
issues, especially in their downtowns. At the same time, cities are facing a shortage of housing,
and a severe shortage of affordable housing. This is a national issue. According to the New York
Times, there is about 998 million square feet of vacant office space in cities across the U.S. This
presents an opportunity to convert vacant, functionally obsolete, and/or underutilized commercial
space to housing units, and many U.S. cities and states are responding to this opportunity by
creating incentives for these conversions.
Metro Cities supports state funding, tax credits and policy tools that will assist with the
conversion of vacant commercial space to residential or new types of uses that support
economic growth of cities.
Metro Cities supports state funding to allow cities and/or their development authorities to
assemble small properties so that business expansion sites will be ready for future
redevelopment.
3-K(3) Workforce Readiness
A trained workforce is important to a strong local, regional, and state economy. Cities have an
interest in the availability of qualified workers and building a future workforce based on current
and future demographics, as part of their economic development efforts. Cities can work with the
public and private sectors to address workforce readiness to include removing barriers to
education access, addressing racial disparities in achievement and employment gaps, addressing
the occupational gender gap, and support training and jobs for people with disabilities. The state
has a role to prepare and train a qualified workforce through the secondary, vocational, and
higher education systems and job training and retraining programs in the Department of
Employment and Economic Development (DEED), including youth employment programs.
Metro Cities supports:
•Increased funding for the Job Skills Partnership, youth employment programs and
other workforce training programs administered by the state that lead to jobs that
provide a living wage and benefits, support workers of all abilities, and help address
racial disparity gaps in employment;
40
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
•Innovative workforce programs and partnerships that foster workforce readiness for a
full range of jobs and careers, including skilled municipal jobs and current high
opportunity areas such as manufacturing and construction;
•Investments in programs that address the gender wage gap, including training for
women to enter nontraditional careers;
•A payroll tax credit for job training programs that invest in employees; and
•A city’s authority to tie workforce requirements to local public finance assistance.
3-L Tax Increment Financing (TIF)
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) continues to be the primary tool available for local communities
to assist economic development, redevelopment, and housing. Over time, statutory changes have
made this critical tool increasingly difficult to use. At the same time, federal and state
development and redevelopment resources have been steadily shrinking. The cumulative impact
of TIF restrictions, shrinking federal and state redevelopment resources and highly restrictive
eminent domain laws constrain cities’ abilities to address problem properties, which leads to an
accelerated level of decline of developed cities in the metropolitan area. Thus, the only source of
revenue available to accomplish the scope of redevelopment necessary is the value created by the
redevelopment itself, or the “increment.” Without the use of the increment, development will
either not occur or is unlikely to be optimal.
Metro Cities urges the Legislature to:
•Not adopt any statutory language that would further constrain or directly or indirectly
reduce the effectiveness of TIF;
•Not adopt any statutory language that would allow a county, school district or special
taxing district to opt out of a TIF district;
•Incorporate the Soils Correction District criteria into the Redevelopment District
criteria so that a Redevelopment District can be comprised of blighted and
contaminated parcels in addition to railroad property;
•Expand the flexibility of TIF to support a broader range of redevelopment projects;
•Amend MN Statutes to clarify that tax increment pooling limitations are calculated on a
cumulative basis;
•Increase the ability to pool increments from other districts to support projects;
41
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
•Expand authority for all cities to transfer unobligated pooled increment from a housing
or redevelopment TIF district to support a local housing trust fund for any eligible
expenditure under Minn. Stat. § 462C.16;
•Modify the housing district income qualification level requirements to allow the levels
to vary according to individual communities and/or to support deeply affordable units;
•Continue to monitor the impacts of tax reform on TIF districts and if warranted
provide cities with additional authority to pay for possible TIF shortfalls;
•Allow for the creation of transit zones and transit-related TIF districts in order to shape
development and related improvements around transit stations but not require the use
of TIF districts to fund the construction or maintenance of the public transit line itself
unless a local community chooses to do so;
•Allow TIF eligibility expansion to innovative technological products, recognizing that
not only physical items create economic value;
•Support changes to TIF law that will facilitate the development of “regional projects”;
•Shift TIF redevelopment policy away from a focus on “blight” and “substandard” to
“functionally obsolete” or a focus on long range planning for a particular community,
reduction in greenhouse gases or other criteria more relevant to current needs;
•Encourage DEED to do an extensive cost-benefit analysis related to redevelopment,
including an analysis of the various funding mechanisms, and an analysis of where the
cost burden falls with each of the options compared to the distribution of the benefits of
the redevelopment project;
•Support TIF for neighborhood recovery efforts in the wake of the foreclosure crisis;
•Consider creating an inter-disciplinary TIF team to review local exception TIF
proposals, using established criteria, and make recommendations to the legislature on
their passage;
•Encourage the State Auditor to continue to work toward a more efficient and
streamlined reporting process. There are an increasing number of noncompliance
notices that have overturned longstanding practices or limited statutorily defined
terms.
The Legislature has not granted TIF rulemaking authority to the State Auditor and the audit
powers granted by statute are not an appropriate vehicle for making administrative or legislative
changes to TIF statutes. If the State Auditor is to exercise rulemaking authority, the
42
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
administrative power to do so must be granted explicitly by the Legislature. The audit
enforcement process does not create a level playing field for cities to challenge the Auditor’s
interpretation of statutes. The Legislature should provide a process through which to resolve
disputes over TIF policy that is fair to all parties;
•Clarify the use of TIF when a sale occurs after the closing of a district;
•Revise the substandard building test to simplify, resolve ambiguities and reduce
continued threat of litigation; and
•Amend TIF statutes to address, through extending districts or other mechanisms,
shortfalls related to declining market values.
3-M Eminent Domain
Significant statutory restrictions on the use of eminent domain have resulted in higher public
costs for traditional public use projects like streets, parks, and sewers, and have all but restricted
the use of eminent domain for redevelopment to cases of extreme blight or contamination.
The proper operation and long-term economic vitality of our cities is dependent on the ability of
a city, its citizens, and its businesses to continually reinvest and reinvent. Reinvestment and
reinvention strategies can occasionally conflict with the priorities of individual residents or
business owners. Eminent domain is a critical tool in the reinvestment and reinvention process
and without it our cities may deteriorate to unprecedented levels before the public reacts.
Metro Cities strongly encourages the Governor and Legislature to revisit eminent domain laws to
allow local governments to address redevelopment problems before those conditions become
financially impossible to address.
Specifically, Metro Cities supports:
•Clarifying contamination standards;
•Developing different standards for redevelopment to include obsolete structures or to
reflect the deterioration conditions that currently exist in the metropolitan area;
•Allowing for the assembly of multiple parcels for redevelopment projects;
•Modifying the public purpose definition under Minn. Stat. § 117 to allow cities to more
expediently address properties that are vacant or abandoned in areas with high levels of
foreclosures, as well as address neighborhood stabilization and recovery;
•Providing the ability to acquire land from “holdouts” who will now view a publicly
funded project as an opportunity for personal gain at taxpayer expense; i.e. allow for
43
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
negotiation using balanced appraisals for fair relocation costs;
•Examining attorney fees and limit fees for attorneys representing a property owner;
•Allowing for relocation costs not to be paid if the city and property owner agree to a
sale contract;
•A property owner’s appraisal to be shared with the city prior to a sale agreement; and
•Appropriately balanced awards of attorney fees and costs of litigation with the outcome
of the eminent domain proceeding.
3-N Community Reinvestment
Communities across the metropolitan region have aging residential and commercial structures
that need repair and reinvestment. Reinvestment prevents neighborhoods from falling into
disrepair, revitalizes communities and protects a city’s tax base.
Metro Cities supports state programs and incentives for reinvestment in older residential
and commercial/industrial buildings, such as, but not limited to, tax credits and/or
property tax deferrals.
Historically, the state has funded programs to promote reinvestment in communities, including
the “This Old House” program, that allowed owners of older homestead property to defer an
increase in their tax capacity resulting from repairs or improvements to the home and “This Old
Shop” for owners of older commercial/industrial property that make improvements that increase
the property’s market value.
3-O Business Incentives Policy
Without a thorough study, the Legislature should not make any substantive changes to the
Business Subsidy Act, as defined in Minn. Stat. § 116J.993, but should look to technical changes
that would streamline both state and local processes and procedures. The Legislature should
distinguish between development incentives and redevelopment activities. In addition, in order to
ensure cohesive and comprehensive regulations, the legislature should limit regulation of
business incentives to the Business Subsidy Act.
Metro Cities supports additional legislation that includes tools to help enhance and
facilitate economic development and job creation. Metro Cities supports increased
flexibility for meeting business subsidy agreements during a state of emergency.
44
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
3-P Broadband Technology
Where many traditional economic development tools have focused on managing the costs and
availability of traditional infrastructure – roads, rail, and utilities – the 21st century economy is
dependent on reliable, cost effective, high bandwidth communications capabilities. This includes
voice, video, data, and other services delivered over cable, telephone, fiber-optic, wireless, and
other platforms.
The state has increased its role in expanding broadband infrastructure across the state by funding
broadband access for residents and businesses. The Governor’s Broadband Task Force regularly
recommends updates to state broadband speed goals and funding levels to expand statewide
broadband access. The Office of Broadband Development in the Department of Employment and
Economic Development (DEED) supports the role of broadband in economic development. The
Office coordinates broadband mapping and administers state broadband grant funds.
Cities play a vital role in achieving significantly higher broadband speeds. Local units of
government are contributing to increasing broadband capacity and ensuring internet connectivity,
reliability, and availability. However, attempts have been made in Minnesota and other states to
restrict or stop cities from facilitating the deployment of broadband services or forming
partnerships with private sector companies to provide broadband services to unserved or
underserved residents or businesses. Restricting municipal authority is contrary to existing state
law on electric utility service, telecommunications, and economic development. Metro Cities
opposes the adoption of state policies that further restrict a city’s ability to finance,
construct or operate broadband telecommunications networks.
Metro Cities supports:
•State policies and support programs that substantially increase speed and capacity of
broadband services statewide, including facilitating solutions at the local level. The state
should offer incentives to private sector service providers to respond to local or regional
needs and to collaborate with cities and other public entities to deploy broadband
infrastructure capable of delivering sufficient bandwidth and capacity to meet
immediate and future local needs as well as policies which seek to position Minnesota as
a state of choice for testing next-generation broadband;
•Metro eligibility for broadband funds, including increased capacity for areas with
existing levels of service;
•Testing and review of street-level broadband speeds and updating of comprehensive
statewide street-level mapping of broadband services to identify underserved areas and
connectivity issues.
•Programs and projects that improve broadband adoption, achieve significantly higher
broadband speeds, and support efforts to improve digital inclusion by ensuring that
45
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
robust and affordable Internet connectivity is widely available to all Minnesotans.
•Municipal authority and encouragement of local governments to play a direct role in
providing broadband service. This includes repealing Minn. Stat. § 237.19. The state
should clarify that cities have the authority to partner with private entities to finance
broadband infrastructure using city bonding authority;
•Local authority to manage and protect public rights-of-way including public and
private infrastructure, to zone, to collect compensation for the use of public assets, or to
work cooperatively with and respond to applications from the private sector. Cities may
exercise local authority over zoning and land-use decisions for siting, upgrading, or
altering wireless service facilities and exercise regulations of structures in the public
right-of-way; and
•Public-private collaborations that support broadband infrastructure and services at the
local and regional level, including partnerships and cooperation in providing last-mile
connections.
3-Q City Role in Environmental Protection and Sustainable Development
Historically, cities have played a major role in environmental protection, particularly in water
quality. Through the construction and operation of wastewater treatment and storm water
management systems, cities are a leader in protecting the surface water of the state. In recent
years, increased emphasis has been placed on protecting ground water and removing
impairments from storm water. In addition, there is increased emphasis on city participation in
controlling our carbon footprint and in promoting green development.
Metro Cities supports public and private environmental protection efforts to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and to further protect surface and ground water. Metro Cities
also supports “green” design and construction techniques to the extent that those
techniques have been thoroughly tested and are truly environmentally beneficial,
economically sustainable and represent sound building practices. Metro Cities supports
additional, feasible environmental protection with adequate funding and incentives to
comply. Metro Cities supports state funding for municipal renewable energy objectives.
Metro Cities supports sustained state funding for new and existing programs that support
local climate action planning, climate resiliency, climate related infrastructure projects
including funding and technical support for local level public-private planning initiatives
that address climate resiliency issues that impact economic viability in the metropolitan
area at a local and regional level.
Green jobs represent employment and entrepreneurial opportunities that are part of the green
economy, as defined in Minn. Stat. § 116J.437, including the four industry sectors of green
products, renewable energy, green services and environmental conservation. Minnesota’s green
46
Housing & Economic Development
2024 Legislative Policies
jobs policies, strategies and investments need to lead to high quality jobs with good wages and
benefits, meeting current wage and labor laws.
3-R Impaired Waters
Local units of government should not bear undue cost burdens associated with completed TMDL
reports. As recent Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) reports show, non-point agricultural
sources are producing more runoff pollution than urban areas at a rate of 13:1. Cities must not be
required as primary entities for funding the clean-up and protection of state and regional water
resources. Benefits of efforts must be proportional to the costs incurred and agricultural sources
must be held responsible for their share of costs.
Metro Cities supports continued development of the metropolitan area in a manner that is
responsive to the market but is cognizant of the need to protect the water resources of the
state and metropolitan area. Since all types of properties are required to pay storm water
fees, Metro Cities opposes entity-specific exemptions from these fees. Metro Cities supports
the goals of the Clean Water Act and efforts at both the federal and state level to implement
it.
Metro Cities supports continued funding of the framework established to improve the
region’s ability to respond to market demands for development and redevelopment,
including dedicated funding for surface water impairment assessments, TMDL
development, storm water construction grants and wastewater construction grants.
47
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
4-A Goals and Principles for Regional Governance
The Twin Cities metropolitan region is home to a majority of the state’s population and is poised
for significant growth in the next two decades. The region faces significant challenges and
opportunities, the responses to which will determine the future success of the metropolitan region
and its competitiveness in the state, national and world economies.
The Metropolitan Council was created to manage the growth of the metropolitan region, and
cities are responsible for adhering to regional plans as they plan for local growth and service
delivery.
The region’s cities are the Metropolitan Council’s primary constituency, as regional and local
growth are primarily managed through city comprehensive planning implementation and the
delivery of public services. To function successfully, the Metropolitan Council must be
accountable to and work collaboratively with city governments.
The role of the Metropolitan Council is to set broad regional goals and provide cities with
technical assistance and incentives to achieve the goals. City governments are responsible for
and best suited to provide local zoning, land use planning, development, and service delivery.
Any additional roles or responsibilities for the Metropolitan Council should be limited to specific
statutory assignments or authorization and should not usurp or conflict with local roles or
processes unless such changes have the consent of the region’s cities.
Metro Cities supports an economically strong and vibrant region, and the effective,
efficient, and equitable provision of regional infrastructure, services, and planning
throughout the metropolitan area.
Metro Cities supports the provision of approved regional systems and planning that are
provided more effectively, efficiently, or equitably on a regional level than by individual
local units of government.
The Metropolitan Council must involve cities in the delivery of regional services and planning,
be responsive to local perspectives on regional issues and be required to provide opportunities
for city participation on Council advisory committees and task forces.
The Metropolitan Council must involve cities at all steps of planning, review and implementation
of the regional development guide, policy plans, systems statements, and local comprehensive
plan requirements to ensure transparency, balance and Council adherence to its core mission and
functions. These processes should allow for stakeholder input before policies and plans are
released for comment and finalized. Any additional functions for the Metropolitan Council
should not be undertaken unless authorized specifically by state law.
48
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
4-B Regional Governance Structure
Metro Cities supports the appointment of Metropolitan Council members by the Governor
with four-year, staggered terms for members to stabilize ideological shifts and provide for
continuity of knowledge on the Council, which is appropriate for a long-range planning
body. The appointment of the Metropolitan Council Chair should coincide with the term of the
Governor. Metro Cities supports a nominating committee process that maximizes
participation and input by local officials. Metro Cities supports expanding the nominating
committee from seven to 13 members, with a majority of a 13-member committee being
local elected officials. Of the local officials appointed to a nominating committee, two thirds
should be elected city officials, appointed by Metro Cities.
Consideration should be given to the creation of four separate nominating committees, with
committee representation from each quadrant of the region.
Metro Cities supports having the names of recommended nominees or other individuals
under consideration for appointment to the Council by the Governor to be made public at
least 21 days prior to final selection by the Governor, and a formal public comment period
before members are appointed to the Council.
Metro Cities supports the appointment of Metropolitan Council members who have
demonstrated the ability to work with cities in a collaborative manner, commit to meet with
local government officials regularly and who are responsive to the circumstances and
concerns of cities in the district that they represent on the Council. Council members should
understand the diversity and the commonalities of the region, and the long-term implications of
regional decision-making. A detailed position description outlining the required skills, time
commitment and understanding of regional and local issues and concerns should be clearly
articulated and posted in advance of the call for nominees. Metro Cities supports opportunities
for local officials to provide input during the decennial legislative redistricting process for
the Metropolitan Council and supports transparency in the redistricting process.
4-C Comprehensive Analysis and Oversight of Metropolitan Council
A comprehensive analysis of the Metropolitan Council’s functions and structure was
conducted by a Governor’s Blue-Ribbon Committee in 2020. Metro Cities supports specific
findings by this committee that recommended four-year staggered terms for Metropolitan
Council members with members appointed by the governor, an expanded nominating
committee with a majority of local officials on the committee, and the publication of
nominees prior to their appointment. These findings are consistent with Metro Cities’
legislative policy on regional governance. The metropolitan region will continue to expand
while simultaneously facing significant challenges for the effective, efficient, and equitable
provision of resources and infrastructure.
49
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
Metro Cities supports an objective study of the Metropolitan Council’s activities and
services as well as its geographical jurisdiction to ensure that the Metropolitan Council’s
services are positioned to be effective and adequate in addressing the future needs of the
region. Such work must include the participation of local officials. The Metropolitan Council
should also examine its scope of services to determine their benefit and efficiency and be open to
alternative methods of delivery to assure that services are provided at high levels of effectiveness
for the region.
Metro Cities supports appropriate legislative oversight of the Metropolitan Council to
regularly review the Council’s activities, and to provide transparency and accountability of
its functions and operations.
4-D Funding Regional Services
The Metropolitan Council should continue to fund regional services and activities through a
combination of user fees, property taxes, and state and federal grants and should set user fees
through an open process that includes public notices and hearings. User fees should be uniform
and set at a level that supports effective and efficient public services based on commonly
accepted industry standards and allows for sufficient reserves to ensure long-term service and fee
stability. Fee proceeds should be used to fund regional services or programs for which they are
collected.
Metro Cities supports the use of property taxes and user fees to fund regional projects so
long as the benefit conferred on the region is proportional to the fee or tax, and the fee or
tax is comparable to the benefit cities receive in return.
4-E Regional Systems
Regional systems are statutorily defined as transportation, aviation, wastewater treatment and
recreational open space. The purpose of the regional systems and the Metropolitan Council’s
authority over the systems is outlined in state law. The Metropolitan Council must seek a
statutory change to alter the focus or expand the reach of any of these systems.
Systems plans prepared by the Metropolitan Council should be specific in terms of size, location,
and timing of regional investments to allow for consideration in local comprehensive planning.
Systems plans should also clearly state the criteria by which local plans will be judged for
consistency with regional systems.
Additional regional systems should be established only if there is a compelling metropolitan
problem or concern best addressed through the designation. Common characteristics of the
existing regional systems include public ownership of the system and its components and
established regional or state funding sources. These characteristics should be present in any new
regional system that might be established. Water supply and housing do not meet necessary
established criteria for regional systems. Any proposed additional system must have an
established regional or state funding source.
50
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
4-F Regional Water Supply Planning
The Metropolitan Council is statutorily authorized to carry out planning activities to address
water supply needs of the metropolitan area. A Metropolitan Area Water Supply Advisory
Committee (MAWSAC) that includes state agency representatives and local officials was
established to assist the Council in developing a master water supply plan that includes
recommendations for clarifying the roles of local, regional, and state governments, streamlining,
and consolidating approval processes and recommending future planning and capital
investments. The Master Water Supply Plan serves as a framework to assist communities in
water supply planning, without usurping local decision-making. Many cities also conduct their
own analyses for use in water supply planning.
As the Metropolitan Council continues to assess the region’s water supply and water
sustainability, it must work cooperatively with local policymakers and local professional staff to
ensure an on-going base of information that is sound, credible, and verifiable, and considers local
information, data, cost-benefit analyses, and projections before any policy recommendations are
issued. Metro Cities encourages the Metropolitan Council to consider the inter-relationships of
wastewater treatment, storm water management and water supply. Any state and regional
regulations and processes should be clearly stated in the Master Water Supply Plan. Further,
regional monitoring and data collection benefits should be shared expenses between the regional
and local units of government.
Metro Cities supports Metropolitan Council planning activities to address regional water
supply needs and water planning activities as prescribed in statute. Metro Cities opposes
the insertion of the Metropolitan Council as another regulator in the water supply arena.
Further, while Metro Cities supports regionally coordinated efforts to address water supply
issues in the metropolitan area, Metro Cities opposes the elevation of water supply to
“Regional System” status, or the assumption of Metropolitan Council control and
management of municipal water supply infrastructure.
Metro Cities supports the technical advisory committee to the MAWSAC that maximizes
participation by municipal officials and helps to ensure sound scientific analyses and
models are developed with local expertise and input before legislative solutions are
considered.
Metro Cities supports efforts to identify capital funding sources to assist with municipal
water supply projects. Any fees or taxes for regional water supply planning activities must be
consistent with activities prescribed in Minn. Stat. § 473. 1565, and support activities specifically
within the metropolitan region.
4-G Review of Local Comprehensive Plans
Local officials identified concerns with the submission and review processes for 2018 local plans
including requests for information beyond what should be necessary for the Metropolitan
51
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
Council to review local plans for consistency with regional systems, regional requirements that
evolved as local plans were prepared and finalized and finding plans to be incomplete or
requiring detailed information on items of a local rather than regional nature, among others.
The Metropolitan Council must work with Metro Cities and local officials to address challenges
and concerns identified with the 2018 comprehensive planning process and undertake any
necessary improvements in advance of the next comprehensive planning cycle. This work should
be conducted with opportunities for ongoing input and consultation with local officials as any
modifications to the comprehensive planning review processes are considered, including but not
limited to a recently established regional planning advisory group that includes Metro Cities and
municipal officials. This work shall include reviewing processes for comprehensive plan
amendments and identifying areas for improvement.
In reviewing local comprehensive plans and plan amendments, the Metropolitan Council should:
•Recognize that its role is to review and comment, unless it is found that the local plan is more
likely than not to have a substantial impact on or contain a substantial departure from one of
the four system plans;
•Be aware of statutory time constraints imposed by the Legislature on plan amendments and
development applications;
•Provide for immediate effectuation of plan amendments that have no potential for
substantial impact on systems plans;
•Require the information needed for the Metropolitan Council to complete its review, but not
prescribe additional content or format beyond that which is required by the Metropolitan
Land Use Planning Act (LUPA);
•Work in a cooperative and timely manner toward the resolution of outstanding issues. When
a city’s local comprehensive plan is deemed incompatible with the Metropolitan
Council’s systems plans, Metro Cities supports a formal appeal process that includes a
peer review. Metro Cities opposes the imposition of sanctions or monetary penalties
when a city’s local comprehensive plan is deemed incompatible with the Metropolitan
Council’s systems plans or the plan fails to meet a statutory deadline when the city has
made legitimate, good faith efforts to meet Metropolitan Council requirements;
•Work with affected cities and other organizations such as the Pollution Control Agency,
Department of Natural Resources, Department of Health, and other stakeholders to identify
common ground and resolve conflicts between respective goals for flexible residential
development and achieving consistency with the Council’s system plans and policies; and
52
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
•Require entities, such as private businesses, nonprofits, or local units of government, among
others, whose actions could adversely affect a comprehensive plan, to be subject to the same
qualifications and/or regulations as the city.
4-H Comprehensive Planning Process
Metro Cities supports examining the comprehensive planning process to make sure that the
process is streamlined and efficient and avoids excessive cost burdens or duplicative or
unnecessary planning requirements by municipalities in the planning process. Metro Cities
supports resources to assist cities in meeting regional goals as part of the comprehensive
planning process, including planning grants and technical assistance.
Metro Cities supports funding and other resources from the Metropolitan Council for the
preparation of comprehensive plan updates, including grant funding. Grants and other
resources should be provided to all eligible communities through a formula that is equitable, and
recognizes varying city needs and capacities.
4-I Comprehensive Planning Schedule
Cities are required to submit comprehensive plan updates to the Metropolitan Council every 10
years. A city’s comprehensive plan represents a community’s vision of how the city should grow
and develop or redevelop, ensure adequate housing, provide essential public infrastructure and
services, protect natural areas, and meet other community objectives.
Metro Cities recognizes the merit of aligning comprehensive plan timelines with the release of
census data. However, the comprehensive plan process is expensive, time consuming and labor
intensive for cities, and the timing for the submission of comprehensive plans should not be
altered solely to better align with census data. If sufficient valid reasons exist for the schedule for
the next round of comprehensive plans to be changed or expedited, cities should be provided
with financial resources to assist them in preparing the next round of plans.
Metro Cities opposes cities being forced into a state of perpetual planning because of
regional and legislative actions. Should changes be made to the comprehensive planning
schedule, Metro Cities supports financial and other resources to assist cities in preparing
and incorporating policy changes in local planning efforts. Metro Cities supports a 10-year
time frame for comprehensive plan update submissions.
Metro Cities supports the Metropolitan Council’s consideration to reduce requirements for
10-year Comprehensive Plan updates for cities under 2,500 residents.
4-J Local Zoning Authority
Local governments are responsible for zoning and local officials should have full authority to
approve variances to remain flexible in response to the unique land use needs of their own
community. Local zoning decisions, and the implementation of cities’ comprehensive plans,
53
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
should not be conditioned upon the approval of the Metropolitan Council or any other
governmental agency.
Metro Cities supports local authority over land use and zoning decisions and opposes the
creation of non-local appeals boards with the authority to supersede city zoning decisions,
and statutory modifications that would diminish the ability of cities to set and implement
local zoning ordinances and policies.
4-K Regional Growth
The most recent regional population forecast prepared by the Metropolitan Council projects a
population of 3,746,000 people by 2040 and 4,001,000 by 2050.
Metro Cities recognizes cities’ responsibility to plan for sustainable growth patterns and the
integration of transportation, housing, parks, open space, and economic development that will
result in a region better equipped to manage population growth, provide a high quality of life for
a growing and increasingly diverse metropolitan area population, and improved environmental
health.
In developing local comprehensive plans to fit within a regional framework, adequate state and
regional financial resources and incentives and maximum flexibility for local planning decisions
are imperative. The regional framework should assist cities in managing growth while being
responsive to the individual qualities, characteristics and needs of metropolitan cities, and should
encourage sub-regional cooperation and coordination.
In order to accommodate this growth in a manner that preserves the region’s high quality of life:
•Natural resource protection will have to be balanced with growth and
development/reinvestment;
•Significant new resources will have to be provided for transportation and transit; and
•New households will have to be incorporated into the core cities, first and second-ring
suburbs, and developing cities through both development and redevelopment.
In order for regional and local planning to result in the successful implementation of regional
policies:
The State of Minnesota must contribute additional financial resources, particularly in the areas
of transportation and transit, community reinvestment, affordable housing development, and the
preservation of parks and open space. If funding for regional infrastructure is not adequate, cities
should not be responsible for meeting the growth forecast set forth by the Metropolitan Council;
•The Metropolitan Council and Legislature must work to pursue levels of state and federal
transportation funding that are adequate to meet identified transportation and transit needs in
54
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
the metropolitan area;
•The Metropolitan Council must recognize the limitations of its authority and continue to
work with cities in a collaborative, incentives-based manner;
•The Metropolitan Council must recognize the various needs and capacities of its many
partners, including but not limited to cities, counties, economic development authorities and
nonprofit organizations, and its policies must be balanced and flexible in their approach;
•Metropolitan counties, adjacent counties and school districts must be brought more
thoroughly into the discussion due to the critical importance of facilities and services such as
county roads and public schools in accommodating forecasted growth; and
•Greater recognition must be given to the fact that the “true” metropolitan region extends
beyond the traditional seven-county area and the need to work collaboratively with adjacent
counties in Minnesota and Wisconsin, and the cities within those counties. The region faces
environmental, transportation, and land use issues that cannot be solved by the seven-county
metro area alone. Metro Cities supports an analysis to determine the impacts of
Metropolitan Council’s growth management policies and infrastructure investments on
the growth and development of the collar counties, and the impacts of growth in the
collar counties on the metropolitan area.
Metro Cities opposes statutory or other regulatory changes that interfere with established
regional and local processes to manage growth in the metropolitan region, including
regional systems plans, systems statements, and local comprehensive plans. Such changes
erode local planning authority as well as the efficient provision of regional infrastructure,
disregard established public processes and create different guidelines for communities that may
result in financial, environmental, and other impacts on surrounding communities.
4-L Natural Resource Protection
Metro Cities recognizes the Metropolitan Council’s efforts to compile and maintain an inventory
and assessment of regionally significant natural resources for providing local communities with
additional information and technical assistance. The state and region play significant roles in the
protection of natural resources. Any steps taken by the state or Metropolitan Council regarding
the protection of natural resources must recognize that:
•The protection of natural resources is significant to a multi-county area that is home to more
than 50 percent of the state’s population and a travel destination for many more. Given the
limited availability of resources and the artificial nature of the metropolitan area’s borders,
and the numerous entities that are involved in protecting the natural resources of the region
and state, neither the region nor individual metropolitan communities would be well served
55
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
by assuming primary responsibility for financing and protecting these resources;
•The completion of local Natural Resource Inventories and Assessments (NRI/A) is not a
regional system nor is it a required component of local comprehensive plans under the
Metropolitan Land Use Planning Act;
•The protection of natural resources should be balanced with the need to accommodate growth
and development, reinvest in established communities, encourage more affordable housing
and provide transportation and transit connections; and
•Decisions about the zoning or land use designations, either within or outside a public park,
nature preserve, or other protected area are, and should remain, the responsibility of local
units of government.
The Metropolitan Council’s role with respect to climate change, as identified in the 2040
regional development guide, should be focused on the stewardship of its internal operations
(wastewater, transit) and working collaboratively with local governments to provide information,
best practices, technical assistance and incentives around responses to climate change.
Metro Cities urges the Legislature and the Metropolitan Council to provide financial assistance
for the preservation of regionally significant natural resources.
4-M Inflow and Infiltration (I/I)
The Metropolitan Council has identified a majority of sewered communities in the metropolitan
region to be contributing excessive inflow and infiltration (I/I) into the regional wastewater
system or to be on the threshold of contributing excessive inflow and infiltration. Inflow and
infiltration are terms for the ways that clear water (ground and storm) makes its way into sanitary
sewer pipes and gets treated, unnecessarily, at regional wastewater plants. The number of
identified communities is subject to change, depending on rain events, and any city in the
metropolitan area can be affected.
The Metropolitan Council establishes a surcharge on cities determined to be contributing
unacceptable amounts of I/I into the wastewater system. The charge is waived when cities meet
certain parameters through local mitigation efforts.
Metro Cities recognizes the importance of controlling I/I because of its potential environmental
and public health impacts, because it affects the size, and therefore the cost, of wastewater
treatment systems and because excessive I/I in one city can affect development capacity of
another. However, there is the potential for cities to incur increasingly exorbitant costs in their
ongoing efforts to mitigate excessive I/I. Therefore, managing I/I at a regional as well as local
level, is critical to effective mitigation and cost management.
Metro Cities continues to monitor the surcharge program and supports continued reviews
of the methodology used to measure excess I/I to ensure that the methodology
56
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
appropriately normalizes for precipitation variability and the Council’s work with cities on
community specific issues around I/I.
Metro Cities supports state financial assistance for metro area I/I mitigation through future
Clean Water Legacy Act appropriations or similar legislation and encourages the
Metropolitan Council to partner in support of such appropriations. Metro Cities also
supports resources, including identified best practices, information on model ordinances,
public education and outreach, and other tools, to local governments to address inflow/
infiltration mitigation for private properties.
A 2023 task force recommended parameters for a private property inflow-infiltration program
that will be funded through a portion of the regional wastewater charge. As a program gets
underway, Metro Cities will monitor program criteria for transparency and accessibility for
eligible cities.
Metro Cities supports continued state capital assistance to provide grants to metropolitan
cities for mitigating inflow and infiltration problems into municipal wastewater collection
systems. Grant funding should continue to be structured so that all eligible cities have access to
this funding assistance.
4-N Sewer Availability Charge (SAC)
Metro Cities supports a SAC program that emphasizes equity, transparency, simplification,
and lower rates.
Metro Cities supports principles for SAC that include program transparency and
simplicity, equity for all served communities and between current and future users, support
for cities’ sewer fee capacities, administrative reasonableness, and weighing any program
uses for specific goals with the impacts to the program’s equity, transparency, and
simplicity. As such, Metro Cities opposes the use of the SAC mechanism to subsidize and/or
incent specific Metropolitan Council goals and objectives. Input from local officials should be
sought if the SAC reserve is proposed to be used for any purpose other than debt service,
including pay-as-you-go (PAYGO). Metro Cities opposes increases to the SAC rate while the
reserve is projected to exceed the Metropolitan Council’s minimum reserve balance,
without the express engagement of city officials in the metropolitan area.
Metro Cities supports current SAC program criteria that use gross square feet in making
SAC determinations, and do not require a new SAC determination for business remodels
that do not change the use of the property. These changes were the result of a 2018 task force
that made recommendations to simplify the SAC program for users, and to reduce incidents of
“surprise” SAC charges.
Metro Cities supports current SAC policy that enhances flexibility in the SAC credit
structure for redevelopment purposes and supports continued evaluation of SAC fees to
determine if they hinder redevelopment.
57
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
Metro Cities supports the Metropolitan Council providing details on how any proposed
changes to the SAC rate are determined. Metro Cities supports a periodic review of MCES’
customer service policies, to ensure that its processes are responsive and transparent to
communities, businesses, and residents. Metro Cities supports continued outreach by
MCES to users of the SAC program to promote knowledge and understanding of SAC
charges and policies. Any modifications to the SAC program or structure should be considered
only with the participation and input of local officials in the metropolitan region.
Metro Cities supports a “growth pays for growth” approach to SAC. If state statutes are
modified to establish a “growth pays for growth” method for SAC, the Metropolitan Council
should convene a group of local officials to identify any technical changes necessary for
implementing the new structure.
Metro Cities supports allowing the Council to utilize a SAC ‘transfer’ mechanism when the
SAC reserve fund is inadequate to meet debt service obligations. Any use of the transfer
mechanism must be done so within parameters prescribed by state law and with appropriate
notification and processes to allow local official input and should include a timely ‘shift back’ of
any funds that were transferred from the wastewater fund to the SAC reserve fund. Efforts
should be made to avoid increasing the municipal wastewater charge in use of the transfer
mechanism.
4-O Funding Regional Parks & Open Space
In the seven-county metropolitan area, regional parks essentially serve as state parks, and the
state should continue to provide capital funding for the acquisition, development, and
improvement of these parks in a manner that is equitable with funding for state parks. State
funding apart from Legacy funds should equal 40 percent of the operating budget for regional
parks. Legacy funds for parks and trails should be balanced between the metropolitan region and
greater Minnesota. Metro Cities supports state funding for regional parks and trails that is
fair, creates a balance of investment across the state, and meets the needs of the region.
4-P Livable Communities
The Livable Communities Act (LCA) under Minn.Stat. 473.25 is administered by the
Metropolitan Council and provides a voluntary, incentive-based approach to affordable housing
development, tax base revitalization, job growth and preservation, brownfield clean up and
mixed-use, transit-friendly development, and redevelopment. Metro Cities strongly supports
the continuation of this approach, which is widely accepted and utilized by cities. Since its
inception in 1995 the LCA program has generated billions of dollars of private and public
investment, created thousands of jobs and added thousands of affordable housing units in the
region.
58
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
Metro Cities monitors the LCA programs on an ongoing basis and supports any necessary
program modifications to ensure that the LCA program criteria are flexible and promote
the participation of all participating communities, and to ensure all metropolitan area cities
are eligible to participate in the Livable Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA).
Metro Cities supports increased funding and flexible eligibility requirements in the LCDA
to assist cities with development that may not be exclusively market driven or market
proven in the location, in order to support important local development and redevelopment
goals. Metro Cities supports the findings of a recent local official working group that
identified the need for the Metropolitan Council to expand its outreach to cities on the LCA
programs and to continue efforts to ensure that LCA criteria are sufficiently flexible to
meet the range of identified program objectives. These efforts should include ongoing
opportunities for structured input by Metro Cities and local officials.
Metro Cities supports the statutory goals and criteria established for the Livable
Communities Act and opposes any changes to LCA programs that constrain flexibility in
statutory goals or program requirements and criteria. Metro Cities is monitoring 2021
modifications to the LCA program to ensure that program criteria are responsive to local
needs within the context of overall LCA objectives.
Metro Cities opposes funding reductions to the Livable Communities Act programs and the
transfer or use of these funds for purposes outside of the LCA program.
Metro Cities supports statutory modifications in the LCDA to reflect the linkages among
the goals, municipal objectives, and Metropolitan Council system objectives.
Metro Cities supports the use of LCA funds for projects in transit improvement areas, as
defined in statute, if funding levels for general LCA programs are adequate to meet
program goals and the program remains accessible to participating communities.
Any proposed program modifications should be considered with input by local officials
before changes to LCA programs are enacted or implemented. Use of interest earnings from
LCA funds should be limited to covering administrative program costs. Remaining interest
earnings should be considered part of LCA funds and used to fund grants from established LCA
accounts per established funding criteria.
4-Q Density
Metro Cities recognizes the need for a density policy, including minimum density requirements,
that allows the Metropolitan Council to effectively plan for and deliver cost-efficient regional
infrastructure and services. Regional density requirements must recognize that local needs and
priorities vary, and requirements must be sufficiently flexible to accommodate local
circumstances as well as the effect of market trends on local development and redevelopment
activity.
59
Metropolitan Agencies
2024 Legislative Policies
The Metropolitan Council asks cities to plan for achieving minimum average net densities across
all areas identified for new growth, development, or redevelopment. Because each community is
different, how and where density is guided is determined by the local unit of government,
regional density requirements should use minimum average net densities and provide flexibility
to accommodate individual city circumstances.
Metro Cities opposes parcel-specific density requirements as such requirements are
contrary to the need for local flexibility in a regional policy.
Any regional density policy must use local data and local development patterns and must
accommodate local physical and land use constraints such as, but not limited to, wetlands, public
open space, trees, water bodies and rights-of-way, and any corresponding federal and state
regulations imposed on local governments when computing net densities. The Metropolitan
Council must coordinate with local governments in establishing or revising regional density
requirements and should ensure that regional density and plat monitoring reports
comprehensively reflect local densities and land uses.
4-R Comprehensive Plans and Environmental Review
Comprehensive plans are essential guiding documents for cities and lay out a range of future
land use scenarios, which are intended to allow for the orderly and economic development of the
metropolitan region. To allow for local flexibility and functionality, as well as to best align local
goals with regional requirements, it is essential that local comprehensive plans remain as high-
level visioning documents that guide future development as well as other city policies.
Recent litigation, if successful, could require local comprehensive plans to meet the standards of
the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (MERA), which is not possible given that they are high
level visioning documents and not development plans. Comprehensive plans, under state law, are
expressly exempt from the Minnesota Environmental Protection Act (MEPA), unlike
development projects, which are regularly and rightfully reviewed under MEPA. This litigation
threatens the autonomy of cities to conduct long term planning and the ability of the
Metropolitan Council to conduct thoughtful, effective regional planning. Metro Cities supports
legislative changes to clarify that cities’ comprehensive plans are exempt from review
under the Minnesota Environmental Rights Act (MERA).
60
Transportation
2024 Legislative Policies
Transportation Policies and Funding Introduction
Metro Cities supports a comprehensive transportation system as a vital component in
planning for and meeting the physical, social, and economic needs of the state and
metropolitan region.
A comprehensive transportation system includes streets and bridges, transit, and multi-modal
solutions that work cohesively to best meet state, regional and local transportation needs.
Adequate and stable sources of funding are necessary to ensure the development and
maintenance of a high quality, efficient and safe transportation system that meets these needs and
that will position the state and region to be economically competitive in the years ahead. Failure
to maintain a functional transportation system will have adverse effects on the state’s ability to
attract and retain businesses and create jobs.
Transportation funding and planning must be a high priority for state, regional and local
policymakers so that the transportation system can meet the needs of the state’s residents and
businesses as well as projected population growth. Funding and planning for regional and
statewide systems must be coordinated at the federal, state, regional and local levels to optimally
achieve long-term needs and goals.
5-A Road and Bridge Funding
Under current financing structures that rely primarily on local property taxes and fees as well as
cities’ share of the Highway User Tax Distribution (HUTD) Fund, road and bridge needs in the
metropolitan region continue to be underfunded. Metro Cities strongly supports stable,
sufficient, and sustainable statewide transportation funding and expanded local tools to
meet the transportation system needs of the region and local municipal systems.
Consideration should be given to using new, expanded, and existing resources to meet these
needs. Metro Cities supports the use of dedicated taxes and fees to fund transportation
infrastructure.
In addition, cities lack adequate tools and resources for the maintenance and improvement of
municipal street systems, with resources restricted to property taxes and special assessments. It is
imperative that alternative revenue generating authority be granted to municipalities and that
state resources be made available for this purpose to aid local communities and relieve the
burden on the property tax system.
Metro Cities supports Municipal State Aid Street (MSAS) funding. MSAS provides an
important but limited revenue source that assists eligible cities with street infrastructure needs
and is limited to twenty percent of a city’s street system.
Metro Cities supports state funding to assist cities over-burdened by cost participation
responsibilities from improvement projects on state or county highways. Metro Cities
supports flexibility in cost participation policies, especially for those cities with a
disproportionate number of state or county highways in and around their local boundaries.
61
Transportation
2024 Legislative Policies
Metro Cities supports state funding for state highway projects, including congestion, bottleneck
and safety improvements. Metro Cities also supports state financial assistance, as well as
innovations in design and construction, to offset the impacts of regional transportation
construction projects on businesses.
Metro Cities opposes statutory changes restricting the use of local funds for transportation
projects. Metro Cities opposes restrictions on aesthetic related components of
transportation projects, as these components often provide important safety and other
benefits to projects.
Metro Cities supports further research into the policy implications for electric and
automated vehicles on roadways, transit, and other components of transportation systems.
Metro Cities encourages the state to study the impact of electric and automated vehicles on
transportation related funding and policies.
5-B Regional Transit System
The Twin Cities Metropolitan Area needs a multi-modal regional transit system as part of a
comprehensive transportation strategy that serves all users, including commuters and the transit
dependent. The transit system should be composed of a mix of high occupancy vehicle (HOV)
lanes, high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes, a network of bike and pedestrian trails, bus rapid transit,
express and regular route bus service, exclusive transit ways, light rail transit, streetcars, and
commuter rail corridors designed to connect residential, employment, retail, and entertainment
centers. The system should be regularly monitored and adjusted to ensure that routes of
service correspond to current and forecasted changes in the region’s transit service needs
and priorities. Metro Cities supports strategic expansion of the regional transit system.
Current congestion levels and forecasted population growth require a stable, reliable, and
growing source of revenue for transit construction and operations so that our metropolitan region
can meet its transportation needs to remain economically competitive. Metro Cities supports an
effective, efficient, and comprehensive regional transit system as an invaluable component
in meeting the multimodal transportation needs of the metropolitan region and to the
region’s economic vibrancy and quality of life.
Metro Cities recognizes that transit service connects residents to jobs, schools, health care, and
activity centers. Transit access and service frequency levels should recognize the role of public
transit in addressing equity, including but not limited to racial and economic disparities, people
with disabilities and the elderly. Metro Cities supports efforts to transition the fleets of
transit providers in the metropolitan region to low or zero emission buses and supports
using equity and environmental criteria identified in transit providers’ zero emission bus
transition plans to prioritize the deployment of zero or low-emission buses.
Metro Cities opposes statutory changes restricting the use of local funds for planning or
construction of transit projects. Restricting local planning and funding limits the ability of
cities to participate in transit corridor planning and development. State and regional
62
Transportation
2024 Legislative Policies
policymakers must coordinate with local units of government as decisions are made at the state
level on transit projects that also involve municipal planning, funding, and policy decisions.
In the interest of including all potential options in the pursuit of a regionally balanced
transit system, Metro Cities opposes the imposition of legislative moratoriums on the study,
planning, design, or construction of specific transit projects.
Metro Cities supports a regional governance structure that ensures a measurably reliable
and efficient system, recognizes the diverse transit needs of our region and addresses
funding needs for all components of the system. These structures must work with and be
responsive to the needs of the communities they serve.
Metro Cities supports an open and collaborative regional transportation planning process
that fully engages all public transit providers as partners in ongoing policy development to
achieve desired outcomes, including establishment of transit project criteria that promote
fair and equitable selection of projects throughout the region and transparent regional
distribution of available funding.
Metro Cities recognizes the need for flexibility in transit systems for cities that border the edges
of the seven-county metropolitan area to ensure users can get to destinations outside of the
seven-county area. Metro Cities encourages the Metropolitan Council to coordinate with collar
counties so that riders can get to and from destinations beyond the boundaries of the region.
Metro Cities is opposed to legislative or Metropolitan Council directives that constrain the
ability of metropolitan transit providers to provide a full range of transit services, including
reverse commute routes, suburb-to-suburb routes, transit hub feeder services or new,
experimental services that may show a low rate of operating cost recovery from the fare
box.
Metro Cities strongly supports the autonomy of suburban transit providers to conduct
operations to meet demonstrated and unique needs in their designated service areas
independent from the operations of other regional transit providers. Metro Cities supports
the ability of a new window to be established for cities to opt out of Metro Transit to either
partner with or join an existing suburban transit provider or to establish their own transit
service.
Suburban transit providers are concerned that funding challenges may be used to attempt to
justify a repeal of their authorizing legislation and to consolidate transit services into a single
regional entity. This would result in reverting to conditions existing nearly 40 years ago when
inadequate service caused twelve suburbs to elect not to be part of the traditional transit system.
In the interest of safety and traffic management, Metro Cities supports further study of rail
safety issues relating to water quality protections, public safety concerns relating to
derailments, traffic implications from longer and more frequent trains and the sensitive
balance between rail commerce and the quality-of-life impacts on the communities through
which they pass.
63
Transportation
2024 Legislative Policies
5-C Transit Financing
Shifting demographics in the metropolitan region will mean increased demand for various modes
of transit in areas with and without current transit service. MVST revenue projections are
unpredictable, and the Legislature has repeatedly reduced general fund support for Metro Transit,
which contributes to persistent operating deficits for regional transit providers.
Operating subsidies necessary to support a regional system should come from regional and
statewide funding sources and not local taxpayers. Until recently, state and regional resources for
transit had diminished, with costs shifting to local taxpayers in the metropolitan area. A system
of transit provides significant economic benefits to the state and metropolitan region and must be
supported with state and regional revenue sources. In addition, capital costs for the expansion of
the regional transit system should be supported through state and regional sources, and not the
sole responsibility of local units of government. In 2023, a 0.75% regional sales and use tax in
the seven county metropolitan region was established to provide funding for transit operations,
maintenance, capital projects.
Metro Cities supports stable and predictable state and regional revenue sources to fund
operating and capital expenses for all regional transit providers and Metro Mobility at a
level sufficient to meet the growing operational and capital transit needs of the region and
to expand the system to areas that lack sufficient transit service options.
Metro Cities continues to support an advisory role for municipal officials in decisions
associated with local transit projects. Metro Cities supports the early engagement of local
governments in transit project planning and development including project scoping, cost
estimating, funding requests and coordination with overlapping initiatives to achieve
successful corridor-based projects.
To promote stable and predictable distribution of Regional Transportation Sales and Use
Tax receipts, Metro Cities supports a collaborative process by which the Metropolitan
Council includes stakeholders in the creation of policy guiding the distribution of funds.
Metro Cities supports the creation of a city allocation from the Regional Transportation
Sales Tax to aid cities with local transportation infrastructure.
5-D Street Improvement Districts
Funding sources for local transportation projects are limited to the use of Municipal State Aid
Street Program (MSAS), property taxes and special assessments. With increasing pressures on
city budgets and limited tools and resources, cities are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain
aging streets.
Street improvement districts allow cities in developed and developing areas to fund new
construction as well as reconstruction and maintenance efforts.
64
Transportation
2024 Legislative Policies
The street improvement district is designed to allow cities, through a fair and objective fee
structure, to create a district or districts within the city in which fees are raised on properties in
the district and spent within the boundaries of the district.
Metro Cities supports the authority of local units of government to establish street
improvement districts. Metro Cities also supports changes to special assessment laws to
make assessing state-owned property a more predictable process with uniformity in the
payment of assessments across the state.
5-E Highway and Bridge Turn Backs & Funding
Cities do not have the financial capacity and in many cities the technical expertise other than
through significant property tax increases, to absorb additional roadway or bridge infrastructure
responsibilities without new funding sources. The existing municipal turnback fund is not
adequate based on contemplated turn backs.
Metro Cities supports jurisdictional reassignment or turnback of roads (Minn. Stat. §
161.16, subd. 4) on a phased basis using functional classifications and other appropriate
criteria subject to a corresponding mechanism for adequate funding of roadway
improvements and continued maintenance.
Metro Cities does not support a wholesale turnback of county or state roads or bridges
without the consent of the municipality and the total cost, agreed to by the municipality,
being reimbursed to the city in a timely manner. The process for establishing state policies
to assign a shared cost participation for newly constructed or rebuilt bridges over trunk
highways to local officials, must include input by the local municipalities affected, and any
assigned shared costs and responsibilities must be agreed to by the municipalities.
5-F “3C” Transportation Planning Process: Elected Officials’ Role
The Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) was developed to meet federal requirements,
designating the Metropolitan Council as the organization that is responsible for a continuous,
comprehensive, and cooperative (3C) transportation planning process to allocate federal funds
among metropolitan area projects. Input by local officials into the planning and prioritization of
transportation investments in the region is a vital component of these processes.
Metro Cities supports continuation of the TAB with a majority of locally elected municipal
officials as members and participating in the process.
5-G Electronic Imaging for Enforcement of Traffic Laws
Enforcement of traffic laws with cameras and other motion imaging technology has been
demonstrated to improve driver compliance and safety.
65
Transportation
2024 Legislative Policies
Metro Cities supports cities having the authority to use such technology, including photos
and videos, to enforce traffic laws.
5-H Transportation Network Companies and Alternative Transportation Modes
The introduction of transportation network companies (TNC) such as Lyft and Uber, vehicle
sharing and other wheeled transportation modes such as bicycles and scooters, require the need
for local officials to determine licensing and inspection requirements for these modes, and to
address issues concerning management over public rights-of-way. Cities have the authority to
license rideshare companies, inspect vehicles, license drivers, and regulate access to sidewalks
and streets. The use of autonomous delivery robots and aerial drones in public rights-of-way is
also becoming more prevalent and cities must maintain and enhance the authority necessary to
regulate the use of these vehicles to ensure safe use of the public right of way.
Metro Cities supports the authority of local officials to regulate and establish fees on these
transportation modes. Emerging and future transportation technologies have potentially
significant implications for local public safety and local public service levels, the needs and
impacts of which vary by community.
5-I Airport Noise Mitigation
Communities closest to MSP and reliever airports are significantly impacted by noise, traffic,
and other numerous expansion-related issues.
Metro Cities supports the broad goal of providing MSP-impacted communities greater
representation on the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC). Metro Cities encourages
continued communication between MAC commissioners and the cities they represent. Balancing
the needs of the MAC, the business community, and the airport host cities and their residents
requires open communication, planning and coordination. Cities must be viewed as partners with
the MAC in resolving differences that arise out of airport projects and the development of
adjacent parcels. Regular contact between the MAC and cities throughout a project proposal
process will enhance communication and problem solving. The MAC should provide full
funding for noise mitigation for all structures in communities impacted by flights in and out of
MSP.
Metro Cities supports noise abatement programs and expenditures and the work of the
Noise Oversight Committee to minimize the impacts of MAC operated facilities on
neighboring communities. The MAC should determine the design and geographic reach of
these programs only after a thorough public input process that considers the priorities and
concerns of impacted cities and their residents. The MAC should provide full funding for noise
mitigation for all structures in communities impacted by flights in and out of MSP.
66
Transportation
2024 Legislative Policies
5-J Funding for Non-Municipal State Aid (MSAS) City Streets
Cities under 5,000 in population are not eligible for Municipal State Aid. Cities over 5,000
residents have limited eligibility for dedicated Highway User Tax Distribution Fund dollars,
which are capped by the state constitution as being available for up to twenty percent of streets.
Current County State Aid Highway (CSAH) distributions to metropolitan counties are inadequate
to provide for the needs of smaller cities in the metropolitan area.
Cities need long-term, stable, funding for street improvements and maintenance. In 2023, the
Legislature established the Transportation Advancement Account which distributes revenue from
the retail delivery fee and the auto parts sales tax to counties, cities, townships, and a food
delivery support account. Specifically, this account will distribute 27 percent of the revenue
collected to cities under 5,000 in population and 15 percent to cities over 5,000 in population.
Metro Cities supported the distribution of revenue deposited into the Transportation
Advancement Account to cities, providing sustainable funding for non-MSAS city streets.
Metro Cities supports additional resources and flexible policies to meet local infrastructure
needs and increased demands on city streets.
5-K County State Aid Highway (CSAH) Distribution Formula
Significant resource needs remain in the metropolitan area CSAH system. Revenues provided by
the Legislature for the CSAH system have resulted in a higher number of projects being
completed. However, greater pressure is being placed on municipalities to participate in cost
sharing activities, encumbering an already over-burdened local funding system. When the
alternative is not building or maintaining roads, cities bear not only the costs of their local
systems but also as much as fifty percent of county road projects. Metro Cities supports special
or additional funding for cities that have burdens of additional cost participation in
projects involving county roads.
Although only 5 percent of CSAH roads are in the metropolitan area, they account for nearly 37
percent of the vehicle miles traveled. The CSAH formula passed by the Legislature in 2008
helped to better account for needs in the metropolitan region but additional resources for the
region are needed. Metro Cities supports a new CSAH formula more equitably designed to
fund the needs of our metropolitan region.
5-L Municipal Input/Consent for Trunk Highways and County Roads
State statutes direct the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to submit detailed
plans, with city cost estimates, at a point one-and-a-half to two years prior to bid letting, at which
time public hearings are held for community input. If MnDOT does not concur with requested
changes, it may appeal. Currently, that process would take a maximum of three and a half
months and the results of the appeals board are binding on both the city and MnDOT.
67
Transportation
2024 Legislative Policies
Metro Cities supports the municipal consent process and opposes changes to weaken
municipal consent or adding another level of government to the consent process. Metro
Cities opposes changes to current statutes that would allow MnDOT to disregard the
appeals board ruling for state trunk highways. Such a change would significantly minimize
MnDOT’s need to negotiate in good faith with cities for appropriate project access and alignment
and would render the public hearing and appeals process meaningless. Metro Cities also
opposes the elimination of the county road municipal consent and appeal process for these
reasons.
5-M Plat Authority
Current law grants counties review and comment authority for access and drainage issues for city
plats abutting county roads.
Metro Cities opposes any statutory change that would grant counties veto power or that
would shorten the 120-day review and permit process time.
5-N MnDOT Maintenance Budget
The state has failed in its responsibility for maintaining major roads throughout the state by
requiring, through omission, that cities bear the burden of maintaining major state roads.
MnDOT should be required to meet standards adopted by cities through local ordinances, or
reimburse cities for labor, equipment and material used on the state’s behalf to improve public
safety or meet local standards. Furthermore, if a city performs maintenance, the city should be
fully reimbursed.
Metro Cities supports MnDOT taking full responsibility for maintaining state-owned
infrastructure and property, including, but not limited to, sound walls and right of way
within city limits. Metro Cities supports cooperative agreements between cities and
MnDOT, which have proven to be effective in other parts of the state. Metro Cities
supports adequate state funding for the maintenance of state rights-of-way.
5-O Transit Taxing District
The transit taxing district, which funds the capital cost of transit service in the Metropolitan Area
through the property tax system, is inequitable. Because the boundaries of the transit taxing
district do not correspond with any rational service line nor is being within the boundaries a
guarantee to receive service, cities within and outside of the taxing district are contributing
unequally to the transit service in the metropolitan area. This inequity should be corrected.
Metro Cities supports a stable revenue source to fund both the capital and operating costs
for transit at the Metropolitan Council. However, Metro Cities does not support the
68
Transportation
2024 Legislative Policies
expansion of the transit taxing district without a corresponding increase in service and an
overall increase in operational funds. To do so would create additional property taxes
without a corresponding benefit.
5-P Complete Streets
A complete street may include sidewalks, bike lanes (or wide paved shoulders), special bus
lanes, comfortable and accessible public transportation stops, frequent and safe crossing
opportunities, median islands, accessible pedestrian signals, curb extensions, narrower travel
lanes and more.
A complete street in a rural area will differ from a complete street in a highly urban area, but
both are designed to balance safety and convenience for everyone using the road.
Metro Cities supports options in state design guidelines for complete streets that would give
cities greater flexibility to:
•Safely accommodate all modes of travel.
•Lower traveling speeds on local streets.
•Address city infrastructure needs.
•Ensure livability in the appropriate context for each city.
Metro Cities opposes state-imposed mandates that would increase street infrastructure
improvement costs in locations and instances where providing access for alternative modes
including cycling and walking are deemed unnecessary or inappropriate as determined by
local jurisdictions.
69
Name Title OrganizationDaniel Buchholtz City Administrator Spring Lake ParkCasey Casella Management Analyst Savage
Jim Dickinson City Administrator Andover
Lori Economy-Scholler Chief Financial Officer Bloomington
Greg Evansky Councilmember Victoria Inderia Falana Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
Ryan Garcia City Administrator South St. Paul LaTonia Green Finance Director Brooklyn Park
*Dana Hardie City Manager Victoria
**Alex Hassel IGR Representative League of MN Cities
Chris Heineman City Administrator Little Canada Laurie Hokkanen City Manager Chanhassen
Mike Huang Councilmember Chaska Steven Huser Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
Tom Lawell City Administrator Apple Valley
**Daniel Lightfoot IGR Representative League of MN Cities
Kristi Luger City Manager Excelsior Madeline Mitchell Senior Budget Analyst St. Paul
Darin Nelson Finance Director Minnetonka Justin Olsen Councilmember Cottage Grove
Loren Olson Senior Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
**Hannah Pallmeyer Government Affairs Liaison Metropolitan Council
Gillian Rosenquist Councilmember Golden Valley Cara Schulz Councilmember Burnsville
Steven Stahmer City Administrator Rogers Katie Topinka IGR Director Minneapolis
Christina Volkers City Administrator Oakdale
*Committee Chair
**Guest/Non-City Official
2023 Municipal Revenues Committee Members
70
Joe Amerman Economic Development Manager Maple Grove
Brett Angell Community Development Director Rogers
Karen Barton Community Development Director St. Louis Park
Tara Beard Housing Director St. Paul
Tim Benetti Community Development Director Apple Valley
Josh Berg Councilmember Elko New Market
Kim Berggren Community Development Director Brooklyn Park
Jenn Brewington Community & Economic Development Director Victoria
Kirt Briggs Mayor Prior Lake
Connie Buesgens Councilmember Columbia Heights
*Heather Butkowski City Administrator Lauderdale
Aaron Chirpich Community Development Director Columbia Heights
Jeffrey Dahl City Manager Wayzata
Samantha DiMaggio Economic Development Manager Chanhassen
Inderia Falana Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
Ryan Garcia City Administrator South St. Paul
Andrew Gitzlaff Community Development Director Oakdale
Tom Goodwin Councilmember Apple Valley
Ben Gozola Asst. Director of Community Assets and Development New Brighton
Derek Gunderson Councilmember Victoria
Janice Gundlach Community Development Director Roseville
Maurice Harris Councilmember Golden Valley
**Alex Hassel IGR Representative League of MN Cities
Stephanie Hawkinson Affordable Housing Development Manager and Planning Edina
Chris Heineman City Administrator Little Canada
Steven Huser Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
Cheryl Jacobson City Administrator Mendota Heights
Marvin Johnson Mayor Independence
Daniel Lightfoot** IGR Representative League of MN Cities
Loren Olson Senior Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
**Hannah Pallmeyer Government Affairs Liaison Metropolitan Council
Danette Parr Community Development Director Maplewood
Eric Petersen IGR Director St. Paul
**Richard Paul
Julie Pointner Councilmember Plymouth
Rebecca Schack Councilmember Minnetonka
Cara Schulz Councilmember Burnsville
Eric Searles Asst. Community Development Director Woodbury Alex Sharpe Planner & Economic Development Specialist Apple Valley
Tracy Shimek Housing & Economic Development Coordinator White Bear Lake
Cherie Shoquist Housing & Economic Development Manager Golden Valley
Lori Sommers Senior Planner Plymouth
Mike Supina Councilmember Eagan
Jeff Thomson Community Development Director Burnsville
Katie Topinka IGR Director Minneapolis
2023 Housing & Economic Development Committee Members
71
Julie Urban Housing & Redevelopment Manager Richfield
Jason Wedel City Manager Prior Lake
Kimberly Wilburn Councilmember Minnetonka
Julie Wischnack Community Development Director Minnetonka
*Committee Chair **Guest/Non-City Official
72
Name Title OrganizationKristy Barnett Councilmember Maple Grove Josh Berg Councilmember Elko New Market
Deb Calvert Councilmember Minnetonka
Macheal Collins City Clerk Burnsville
Jim Dickinson City Administrator Andover Inderia Falana Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
Thomas Fletcher Councilmember Greenwood Mike Funk City Manager Minnetonka
*Gary Hansen Councilmember Eagan
**Alex Hassel IGR Representative League of MN Cities
Steven Huser Government Relations Representative Minneapolis Cheryl Jacobson City Administrator Mendota Heights
Elizabeth Kautz Mayor Burnsville Gregg Lindberg City Manager Burnsville
Amada Marquez Simula Mayor Columbia Heights
Deb McMillan Mayor Victoria
Hugo McPhee Assistant City Manager Burnsville Alyssa Nelson Assistant City Manager Victoria
Loren Olson Senior Government Relations Representative Minneapolis **Hannah Pallmeyer Government Affairs Liaison Metropolitan Council
Eric Petersen IGR Director St. Paul
Katie Rodriguez City Manager Richfield
Jay Stroebel City Manager Brooklyn Park Michael Sund Civic Engagement Coordinator St. Louis Park
Katie Topinka IGR Director Minneapolis Nyle Zikmund City Administrator Mounds View
2023 Metropolitan Agencies Committee Members
*Committee Chair**Guest/Non-City Official
73
2023 Transportation & General Government Committee Members
Name Title Organization
Kristin Asher Public Works Director Richfield
Josh Berg Councilmember Elko New Market
Kissy Coakley Councilmember Minnetonka
Inderia Falana Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
Jesse Farrell City Engineer Oakdale
**Anne Finn IGR Director League of MN Cities
Thomas Fletcher Councilmember Greenwood
Gary Hansen Councilmember Eagan
**Alex Hassel Intergovernmental Relations Representative League of MN Cities
Sean Hayford Oleary Councilmember Richfield
Debra Heiser Engineering Director St. Louis Park
Steven Huser Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
**Craig Johnson IGR Representative League of MN Cities
Dan Kealey Councilmember Burnsville
Brad Larson City Administrator Savage
**Daniel Lightfoot IGR Representative League of MN Cities
Brent Mareck City Manager Carver
Amáda Márquez Simula Mayor Columbia Heights
Mary McComber Mayor Oak Park Heights
Hugo McPhee Deputy City Manager Burnsville
Justin Miller City Administrator Lakeville
Alyssa Nelson Assistant City Manager Victoria
Heidi Nelson City Administrator Maple Grove
Kari Niedfeldt-Thomas Mayor New Brighton
Loren Olson Senior Government Relations Representative Minneapolis
**Hannah Pallmeyer Government Affairs Liaison Metropolitan Council
Chelsea Petersen Assistant City Administrator Shakopee
Eric Petersen IGR Director St. Paul
Nick Peterson City Engineer St. Paul
Andy Reiff Councilmember Victoria
Dan Ruiz Public Works Director Brooklyn Park
Dave Shoger Public Works Director Victoria
*Michael Thompson Public Works Director Plymouth
Katie Topinka IGR Director Minneapolis
Patrick Trudgeon City Manager Roseville
Wally Wysopal City Manager Fridley Nyle Zikmund City Administrator Mounds View
*Committee Chair **Guest/Non-City Official 74
December 19, 2023
Mayor and City Council
Scott H. Neal, City Manager
Gillian Straub, City Management Fellow
2024 Federal Legislative Platform
Information / Background:
City Council members attend the annual National League of Cities’ (NLC) Congressional City Conference in
Washington DC. At this conference, Council members conduct lobbying visits with federally elected
Minnesota representatives and senators to discuss issues important to Edina and municipalities. The types of
issues on the City’s federal legislative platform range from maintaining local control to addressing immediate
concerns.
The following items are a draft of the 2024 legislative platform. Staff will seek approval for this platform in
2024, following incorporation of Council feedback and additional staff input.
1 Affordable Housing
Supplying affordable housing to all Minnesotans is an important investment to make in the state’s future.
Unfortunately, the funding available falls far short of what is needed. Cities cannot close the housing
affordability gap on their own. The City urges Congress to increase the allocation to Low-Income Housing
Tax Credits (LIHTC), prioritize affordable housing and work with local partners to coordinate federal
housing resources.
The City also asks Congress to reduce the bond threshold from 50 percent to 25 percent of eligible costs
for LIHTC, allowing the tax-exempt bonds to leverage more 4 percent credit across projects. The City
urges Congress to support the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Home Investment
Partnership (HOME) programs. These programs are the principal source of federal revenue for localities to
use in developing and implementing community development solutions that create and sustain healthy,
functioning communities.
2 Climate Change
The City approved its first Climate Action Plan in December 2021. The plan includes 200 actions that can be
taken in Edina to meet its 2030 goal of 45% fewer greenhouse gas emissions from 2019. We ask the federal
STAFF REPORT Page 2
government to promote systematic changes to the U.S. economy that address climate change, including, but
not limited to:
• Supporting and coordinating the efforts of states to address climate change.
• Leading with environmental justice by recognizing the impact of economic changes on people and
communities, helping mitigate the negative impact on vulnerable individuals and frontline communities,
and ensuring an equitable distribution of the benefits and protections. This will ensure clean air, land,
and water for generations to come.
• Establishing workforce development procedures that support a just transition from fossil fuel-
dependent jobs to jobs that support actions needed to address climate change. This includes providing
training for new and transitioning workers; and robustly funding and support federal resources to
protect workers and their rights.
• Supporting and promoting energy efficiency in new and existing buildings.
• Providing regulation and incentives for states to reduce onsite fossil fuel combustion from vehicles,
equipment and home appliances and transition to electric fuel sources.
• Converting all electricity generation to carbon-free or renewable sources.
• Decarbonizing our economy by reducing embodied carbon in product and material lifecycles,
particularly in new building construction and vehicle production.
• Aligning our land stewardship policies, including urban and rural land use, to maximize carbon
recapture and promote soil health through policies that:
o Ensures a regenerative food system that does not negatively impact human, soil and water
health goals
o Increases tree canopies and maintains existing urban and rural forests
o Protects and improves water resources
o Expands access to nature for all people
o Creating a system for measuring and reporting progress on these goals.
3 Enable Cities to Protect Residents from Harmful Levels of Aviation Noise
The City identified aviation noise as a key threat to the quality of life in Edina. The City requests support
from Edina’s federally elected officials for eliminating Categorical Exclusions (CATEX) when implementing
Performance Based Navigation (PBN). The process should ensure that ground impacts and community
concerns are incorporated into PBN that will change noise exposure. Regarding measuring noise, Day/Night
Noise Level (DNL) is an average and humans do not perceive noise in averages but rather as individual
events, so we believe it is time to investigate alternative metrics.
The City is concerned about the impacts from the increased number and frequency of flights under
traditional PBN tracks. There is currently very little information pertaining to the human impact of the
concentration of flights associated with PBN procedures. Our residents are exposed to continuous
concentrated noise due to our proximity to the airport. Although there may not be an increase in average
noise as measured by DNL, there are unknown impacts from the increased number and frequency of flights.
Given the age of some Sound Insulation Programs (SIP) in the United States, the increase in traffic density at
our nation’s airports and improved technologies, the Edina City Council supports the eligibility standards
used prior to the September 2012 Program Guidance Letter (PGL-12-09).The Edina City Council opposes
the privatization of Air Traffic Control. We are concerned it may reduce the accountability of the
STAFF REPORT Page 3
organization to Congress, and that without a mechanism for compelling the private company to meet and
discuss community concerns, there will be fewer opportunities for advocacy on noise impacts. The FAA has
taken positive steps to improve community engagement, including adopting a Community Involvement
Manual and hiring a Community Involvement Manager for Airspace Projects. The Edina City Council believes
that this will result in a more efficient and successful implementation of NextGen and we strongly support
these efforts.
4 Post Office Preservation
The Edina Post Office in the 50th & France District in Edina is housed in a leased facility. The Edina Post
Office is important to the Edina, Minneapolis and St. Louis Park residents it serves. We ask your support in
keeping a full-service post office in the 50th & France District and to initiate the planning process for a new
post office within the next 24 months.
5 Protection of Municipal Bonds
The City’s Aaa and AAA credit ratings from Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s Investors Services are a source
of community pride and represent the financial strength of our city. These ratings create opportunities for
the City to invest in our community’s future and provide the best value in public services back to our
residents.
It is the combination of local control and local responsibility that make municipal bonds such an effective and
efficient tool. Any changes to the tax code should recognize the vital role of tax-except municipal bonds.
The City asks you to oppose any attempt to make changes to the tax-exempt status that would increase the
cost of financing for cities as doing so would be devastating for our operations, our services and, ultimately,
our residents.
6 Election Security
The City urges Congress to protect the integrity of the entire election system, including cybersecurity,
physical security for election materials and equipment, emergency planning for possible disruptions, trainings
for election staff and process risk.
7 State and Local Tax (SALT) Deduction
The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act reduced the opportunity for taxpayers to fully itemize deductions for their
state and local taxes (SALT) against their federal income tax liability. This fundamental change to the tax
code will have a detrimental impact on many taxpayers in Edina. We ask for your support in reversing this
change to the tax code and reinstating full federal deductibility of state and local taxes.