06-200Council File # 06-200
Green Sheet# 3029750
RESOLUTION
OF SAIfdT PAUL, MINNESOTA �
Idenfifying Joint Legisiafive Interests of the Cifies of Saint Paul and Minneapolis
Whereas, the core ciries of Saint Paul and Minneapolis ("the Cities"), though each is unique, shaze a
number of common interests, concerns and issues; and
6 Whereas, both strive to provide a high quality of life for their residents; and
7
8 Whereas, the 2003, 2004, and 2005 Local Government Aid (LGA) reductions resulted in a reduced level of
9 essential services, resource scarcity with a needs increase, a rise in fee and tax rates, and a widening
10 disparity between the Cities' taac rates and those in surrounding communities; and
11
12 Whereas, the Cities are the economic hub of the State of Minnesota, with interconnected industries that
13 rely upon each city's respective infrastructure, housing stock and workforce; and
14
I S Whereas, the Cities provide significant contributions to the State of Minnesota's economy and are the
16 cultural and educational centers of the Upper Midwest; and
17
18 Whereas, both Cities have a history of strong local leadership and highly prize their ability to make
19 independent decisions on service levels, local land use and local tax policy;
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Presented by
Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved by the City Councils of the City of Minneapolis and the City of Saint
Paul:
That in a cooperative effort the Cities jointly support as their highest regional priority the funding for Light
Rail along the Central Corridor, which serves as critical infrastructure for the economic hub of the State
and provides opportunity for long-term economic vitality, and
That the Cities also jointly endarse the following legislative initiatives:
30 •
31
32
33
34 •
35
36
37
38 •
39
40
41
42
Support adequate dedicated revenue sources for the development and operation of transit and
transportation throughout the metro area to allow for long-term planning and an organized, fully-
funded operations systems, without increasing financial burdens on local governments.
Support the language passed by the 2005 legislature for a constitutional amendment t4 be presented to
voters November 2006, which dedicates the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST) for transit and
transportation funding.
Support full funding of the current Loca1 Government Aid formula and oppose the phase out of
Limited Market Value. These measures will prevent significant increases in property taxes, fees and
reductions in services.
�� adrJ
43 • Support legislation that permits cities' use of eminent domain for redevelopment and blight mitigation,
44 through a process that establishes reasonable procedures and fair standards for its application.
45
46 • Support state assistance to finance the redevelopment of brownfields and the elimination of blight.
47 Many of the Cities' redevelopment opportuniries aze either in total, or in par[, a brownfield or are
48 blighted. The state has adopted changes to tax and redevelopment laws that have enabled mitigation of
49 brownfields and blight. In addition the state has provided funding for statewide programs but the
50 funding level is usually inadequate to meet requests.
51
52 • Support adequate funding for affordable housing and housing programs that serve low-income and
53 homeless residents.
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
• Support the Historic Preservation Tax Credit, which provides a 25% state income taac credit on
qualified historic preservation expenditures on historic preservation projects, and serves as an incentive
for rehabilitating historic structures as well as a tool for community redevelopment.
• Support state funding to develop bioscience initiatives including research and related infrastructure.
The Cities have jointly planned public improvements for the bioscience zone, and funding is needed to
make improvements that enhance the zone's marketability and accessibility.
• Support funding for the entire public safety system, including such critical functions as police, fire,
prosecutors, public defense, probation, courts and communication systems.
• Support fixnding and a framework to reduce the concentration of released sex offenders in the core
Cities.
69 • Support a statewide smoking ban, provided the ability of local units of governments to enact more
70 restrictive ordinances is not prohibited.
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
• Support measures to reduce disparities the Twin Cities region, particulazly the core Cities, through
resources that focus on children as a critical component for ensuring a prosperous and economically
competitive Twin Cities.
• Support the goals of the Clean Water Legacy Act, with an on-going review to assure that funds are
properly distributed for protection of our water resources as well as to support future development and
redevelopment. Both Cities support an equitable funding solution for the Clean Water Legacy Act but
oppose the use of surcharges on local utility fees.
81 • Support the Minnesota Department of Health capital bonding request to help fund an Interconnect
82 between the Saint Paul and Minneapolis drinlcing water systems.
83
dG -ado
��
Support legislation funding the state grant program that provides cities with financial assistance to
remove diseased and damaged trees, and to reforest.
Benanav
Bosuom
Yeas
✓
Requested by Deparhnent of:
�
Form Approved by City Attomey
By:
Adopted by Council: Date
Adoption Certified by Council Secretary U
BY� ` So's� . _
Approve b � ate Z— �-F — C? {
sy. - �� �P �
Form Approved by Mayor for Submission to Counci]
By:
O� -�JD
� Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet Green Sheet �
co -���
Contad Person 8 Phone:
Camdlmember Hdgen
Z66-8670
Must Be on Cauncil Agenda by (Date):
22-FEB-O6
ContractType:
RE-RESOLU�S70i3
���� I Green Sheet NO: 3029750
� '
Assign
Number
For
Rauting
Order
ToFal # M Signature Pages _(Clip NI Lowtions for Signature)
Deoartrrent Smt7oPe'son InitiallDate
0
1 ou '
2 av erk lerk
3
4
5
Legislative Interests of the Cities of Saint Paul and Minneapolis.
itlatiors: Appro�e (A) or R
Pianning Canmission
CB Committee
Civl Senice Commission
Personal
Mswerthe Pollowing Ouestions:
1. Has this persoNfirtn e�er worked under a contract forthis departmeM?
Yes No
2. Has this persorJfirtn e�er 6sen a city employee?
Yes No
3. Does this persorJfirm possess a skill rwt namally possessed by any
cu�reM city employee?
Yes rb
Explain all yes answers on separete sheetand attach to green sheet
Initiating Problem, Issues, Opportunily (Who, Wha; When, Where, WAy):
AdvanWges HAppwved:
DisadvaMages tlApproved:
pisadvantages If Not Approved:
Total Amount of
- � Transaction:
Funding Souroe:
Financial IMormation:
(Explain)
F�roary >7, 2006 1229 PM
CosURevenue Budgetetl:
Activity Number:
Page 1