4.1. SR 09-23-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SEP-12-2002 1G:16 LEAGUE DF MN CITIES P.O4×lS These models are based on actual ordinances that have been reviewed by gas and electric companies. Because these models are more city-oriented than many currently existing franchises, and because of increasing competition between and among energy providers, utilities have objected to many of the provisions contained in these models. As a result, there is likely to be vigorous negotiation on at least the following provisions: I) franchise fees; in form, mount and class of service/large customer distinctions; 2) fee obligation on competitors; 3) rights regarding city-requested location and relocation of facilities; and 4) the scope of the utility's indemnity of the city. It should be noted that many of the revisions to the March, 1996 Model were made in order to incorporate MPUC's right-of-way rules on such matters as street restoration, relocation for utilities, construction performance bonds, mapping information, street vacation, removal of abandoned facilities, and indemnification. The MPUC right-of-way rules were largely a product of negotiations between local government units and members of the utility including a number of gas and electric providers. Each city must evaluate the importance of the provisions contained in these models as such provisions may affect the city's particular needs. One franchise cannot fit all because of the many variations of city-utility relationships, including factors such as: urban, suburban or rural settings; developing v. redeveloping cities; single v. multiple utilities serving the city; residential-commercial customer mix; larger employer v. diversified economic base; the presence of a municipal utility or contemplated utility; and revenue needs of the city. The authors should be contact if there are any questions about a clause or section. You can call Tom Gmndhoefer at (651) 251-1266 or James Strommen at (612) 337-9233.