Laserfiche WebLink
~ , League of Minnesota Cities <br />:~ Cities bulletin <br />~~ <br /> <br />Number 23 June 9, 1995 <br />1995 legislative session comes to an end <br />Gary Carlson <br />The 1995 legislative session might <br />best be summarized as a session where <br />bad ideas flourished. Fortunately, few <br />became law. Members of the House <br />authored 1,999 bills and Senators <br />introduced 1,788 proposals before the <br />end of the session, a rate eclipsing that <br />of the 1993 appropriation session. A <br />significant number of the nearly 4,000 <br />bills introduced this session, if enacted <br />into law, would have had some <br />measurable impact on cities. <br />The pre-session events started off <br />on a sour note with a relatively weak <br />budget forecast in November. Based <br />on the weak budget projections, the <br />Governor proposed a budget in January <br />that included a reduction of $77 million <br />in city LGA and HACA. The bad news <br />did non stop there. With few additional <br />state resources at their disposal, <br />lawmakers seemed to turn their <br />attention to local government. This, in <br />turn, led to several disagreeable notions <br />including. aid distribution councils, <br />reverse referenda requirement for city <br />and county levy increases, salary caps <br />for local officials, the property tax <br />freeze, taxation of state and municipal <br />bond interest, two-day elections, <br />preemption of local regulation of <br />shooting ranges, and the list goes on <br />and on. <br />From the outset of the session, <br />taxes were taboo. In fact, even non-tax <br />revenue enhancements such as user <br />fees or service. charges were attacked as. <br />back-door tax increases. For example, <br />when the League met with legislators <br />to request compensation for the use of <br />public rights-of-way for telecommuni- <br />cations purposes, legislators were <br />concerned that taxpayers would <br />interpret this as a tax increase. With <br />these perceived constraints affecting <br />legislators, it was apparent early on that <br />requests for additional funding for <br />cities would be futile. It was also <br />apparent that cities would be forced to <br />defend and protect remaining state <br />shared revenues such as LGA and <br />HACA. <br />When evaluating the outcomes of <br />the session, it may appear to have <br />ended in a draw -- few favorable new <br />initiatives for cities, but also remark- <br />ably few negative or onerous new laws <br />imposed. The drama of the 1995 <br />session may have been more intriguing, <br />however, than many previous sessions. <br />Up to the last day of the regular <br />session, cities battled proposals to slash <br />HACA and LGA funding. Last minute <br />proposals to do so were tied to funding <br />our state's complicated K-12 education <br />finance system. In addition, legislation <br />to preempt local authority to regulate <br />tobacco sates and zoning of shooting <br />ranges were actively pursued and <br />indicative of other efforts to diminish <br />the importance and authority of cities. <br />Nonetheless, cities can claim <br />victory on several fronts. <br />Page 4 -Policy development Page LS 1 -New taws <br />LMC policy committee work A complete summary of new <br />begins in July. New committee laws affecting cities begins on <br />members are always welcome. page LS 1. <br />State aid to cities <br />Despite the Governor's proposal to <br />slash funding for cities, the League and <br />other city affiliate groups succeeded in <br />minimizing the impact of the proposed ` <br />See Session, page 3 ., <br />The league sends the Cities <br />Bulletin to the mayor and to the <br />:'administrator or clerk. Be sure to <br />routeit to your councilmembers <br />and department heads. <br />