Laserfiche WebLink
If not addressed, existing taxpayers <br />will foot the bill for streets that are <br />only needed because of proposed <br />residential development. <br />(2') LEAGUE of <br />LHC MINNESOTA <br />CITIES <br />9,2020 League of Minnesota Cities. All Rights Reserved. <br />PROBLEM: <br />When a new subdivision proposal is presented to <br />a city by a developer, city officals consider how <br />that development will connect with the rest of the <br />community through new city streets, or how the added <br />capacity will impact existing city streets. <br />Many cities plan street work years in advance, and new <br />development creates additional demand. <br />However, legal interpretation of current law does not <br />allow for cities to collect fees from developers to help <br />pay for these future investments. <br />LEAGUE -SUPPORTED SOLUTION: <br />The League supports HF2296 / SF2442 and HF2297 <br />/ SF2443 (Rep. Brad Tabke, Sen. Eric Pratt), providing <br />the necessary statutory authority for cities to be able <br />to charge developers fees that cover the infrastructure <br />improvements that are needed because of the new <br />residential development. <br />BACKGROUND: <br />The Minnesota Supreme Court found in Harstad <br />v. City of Woodbury that cities do not have the <br />statutory authority necessary to impose a fee <br />for future street improvements when approving <br />residential development. Cities need a clear and <br />lawful path forward to support development while <br />protecting the interests of current taxpayers. <br />For more Information: <br />Irene Kao, Intergovernmental Relations Counsel <br />Phone: (651) 281-1260 <br />Email: ikao@lmc.org <br />www.imc.org/builditright <br />