6.1. SR 01-25-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. SURFACE WATER MANAGEMENT IMPACT FEE The city has wrestled with how to fund surface water management (SWM) improvements for the past six years or so. The issue really came to a head when the city financed large storm sewer pipe improvements for the upgrade of the Highway 101110/169 interchange. Other major SWM improvements have followed along with the adoption of a city wide surface water management plan. The city's system is interrelated with the county ditch system, and the pipes underneath Highway 169/10 are actually part of the county ditch system. As an additional note, the city and county have had special legislation passed which allows the city to take over county ditches upon mutual agreement by both parties. We have not needed this law to date, but we have done things with the county such as the work on Ditch 10 west of 169 (Hohlen property), whereby the ditch was abandoned and the surface water was channeled through a system of pipes and a relocated ditch under city jurisdiction. . The city finances the vast majority of its SWM expenses with tax levy money. A relatively small portion of the total SWM money comes from developers and development projects. However, developers and development projects are required to finance their own internal SWM system which, ultimately, feeds into the trunk system. Information that the city has obtained from other developing municipalities indicates that our charges to developers are much lower than comparable communities. This simply means that the taxpayer has to fund more for the city SWM trunk system. The resolution approved a few years ago calls for an annual 3 percent increase in the fees on development projects. Once, a few years ago, the council jumped that to 10 percent, but since then it has reverted back to 3 percent increases. Based on the East Elk River SWM needs, the city will either have to do a 20 year bond to finance activities and/or look at a significant increase in the annual SWM tax levy. This issue is really a capital improvement program discussion item, but I wanted to let the council know about my on-going concern regarding adequate funding of our trunk SWM needs and this low development SWM fee. BUILDING PERMITS The city has always followed the state building code and, when appropriate, formally adopts the updated version of the state code. Municipalities are usually 2 to 3 years behind in the adoption of the state code. For example, in . late 1996, the city adopted the 1994 code. Today in 1999, we are looking at