Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Minutes - October 24, 2000 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Council Business <br /> <br />City Manager Matthew Fulton explained the City is considering the possible initiation of a <br />utility franchisc fce within a franchise agreement currently being negotiated with Xcel <br />Energy. The franchise fee was presented as a realignment of revenues to hclp support the <br />maintenance and upkeep of the City's right-of-way (ROW) and street infrastructure. The <br />fcc would be based on a rate per therm or kilowatt hour and would generate approximately <br />$465,000 annually depending on actual consumption levels and utility customers. Of that, <br />$315,000 would be used to offset the anticipated property tax levy for 2001 while the <br />remaining would be used for specific new projects. Those new projects would involve <br />extension of lighting systems and the burial of electrical lines on major city streets. <br /> <br />Public informational meetings were held on October 17 and 19, and most comments <br />rcceived indicated a desire to not implement a franchise fee. Staff reasons for <br />implementing this fee relate to the following: <br />· appropriate realignment of revenues which attributes a portion of costs association <br />with the maintenance of the ROW with those who benefit directly <br />· prepares for the expansion of the electrical distribution system <br />· franchisc fces provide property tax relief <br />· franchise fee is a more equitable and cost effective method of payment <br /> <br />Samuelson and Moorc~Sykes noted the efforts of City Engineer Les Proper in researching <br />this issue. <br /> <br />AI Fimol1, 280 1st St. SE, questioned the reason why the City is researching initiation of <br />this fec. Fulton said staff proposed to Council the appropriateness of this fee, Council <br />directed staff to develop a communications plan and a process for public input. <br />Samuelson noted public notification was provided through mailing and articles in the New <br />Bril!hton Bulletin. <br /> <br />Chuck Haiden, 990 8th Ave. NW, objects to the billing method being proposed to charge <br />this fee. He fcels if additional money is nceded to run the government, then it should be <br />rcccived through existing taxation methods such as the property tax statement. <br /> <br />Jim Witowski, 533 4th Ave. NW, opposes the fee and said many residents never received <br />notification of the meetings or a pamphlet explaining the fec. <br /> <br />Samuelson explained that Council will take no action tonight on this issue and will <br />continue discussion of this item at the November 14 Council meeting. <br /> <br />Fulton presented an appeal request in regards to the ROW Tree Trimming Ruling by the <br />League ofMN Citics Insurance Trust (LMClT) #11030608. This issue relates to tree <br />trimming activities conducted last year by a contractor hired by the City. <br /> <br />Maurie Wolf, 2670 14th St. NW, wishes to appeal the LMCIT ruling due to the excessive <br />removal of trce branches on his property. He questioned the contractor's judgement that <br />the tips ofthe branches encroached upon the 13.5 ft. ROW requirement. He believcs the <br />trimming had been performed in an unreasonable manner, and is requesting reversal ofthe <br />LMCIT ruling for damages in the amount of $5,500.00. <br /> <br />Council Business <br /> <br />Franchise Fces <br />Report 00-247 <br /> <br />ROW Tree Trimming <br />Appeal <br />Report 00-251 <br />