My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6.1.A. ERMUSR 04-12-2016
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Utilities Commission
>
Packets
>
2014-2024
>
2016
>
04-12-2016
>
6.1.A. ERMUSR 04-12-2016
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/14/2016 3:51:02 PM
Creation date
4/14/2016 3:50:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Government
type
ERMUSR
date
4/12/2016
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
state, but they believe it would be useful to take another look at the program. They thought <br /> there would be opportunities to work on the infrastructure project provisions of the bill. <br /> DFL Representatives Hortman and Simonson also expressed willingness to work with Rep. <br /> Baker on a bill that could get bipartisan support. <br /> The bill was laid over for possible inclusion in a future omnibus bill. MMUA Government <br /> Relations staff will continue to work with Rep. Baker and other stakeholders to move forward <br /> with CIP improvements that will benefit our members. <br /> Mora Wastewater Treatment Tax Exemption <br /> On Thursday, legislation allowing the City of Mora to receive a refundable tax credit for sales <br /> taxes paid on construction materials for its wastewater treatment facility was heard in the <br /> Senate Tax Committee. SF 829 is authored by Sen. Tony Lourey (DFL-Kerrick). <br /> Mora City Administrator Joel Dhien explained that the new $5.3 million facility is currently <br /> under construction. Although the City could have received a sales tax exemption for <br /> construction materials had they purchased them separately from the contractor, separating <br /> labor and materials would add to the overall project costs. Concerns with material storage <br /> and liability also played into the decision to use traditional labor/material construction <br /> contracting. A refund of the construction materials sales tax would save the City around <br /> $200,000. <br /> This issue was also discussed in the 2015 Legislative Session, and the House included in its <br /> tax bill a provision to allow all cities to apply for a refundable credit of sales taxes paid on <br /> construction material (an initiative which has been strongly supported by MMUA). Senate <br /> Tax Char Rod Skoe (DFL- Clearbrook) explained that the Senate is aware of the issue and is <br /> "checking to see if there is a mechanism to streamline the process" of cities accessing the <br /> construction materials sales tax exemption. The Senate's concern is that contractors would <br /> over-purchase materials in an effort to use the cities' tax exemption. Skoe noted that the <br /> issue would be discussed with the House in the tax conference committee but acknowledged <br /> Mora would need a retroactive solution since their project is already underway. <br /> MMUA Government Relations staff will continue to monitor the construction materials sales <br /> tax discussion and advocate for its inclusion in a final tax bill. <br /> Railroad Crossing Fee Heads to Senate Floor (Again) <br /> On Thursday, legislation to establish a uniform $750 fee for utilities crossing railroad right- <br /> of-way was discussed in the Senate Environment and Energy Committee. The bill (SF 877) <br /> had advanced to the Senate floor during the 2015 Legislative Session, but never received a <br /> vote, so was procedurally returned to committee. A favorable amendment for utilities was <br /> adopted by the committee and makes the bill consistent with a law that was just passed in <br /> South Dakota. Representatives from MREA and the MN Telecom Alliance highlighted the <br /> inconsistent and high fees that utilities were being charged to cross railroad right-of-way. <br /> The MN Regional Railroad Association and Union Pacific expressed their opposition. <br /> The bill was again passed to the Senate floor. <br /> 221 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.