III.5. Presentations from Representative Youakim and Senator Latz
City Manager
CITY OF HOPKINS
Memorandum
To: Honorable Mayor and Council Members
From: Mike Mornson, City Manager
Date: February 29, 2016
Subject: 2016 Legislative Initiatives
_____________________________________________________________________
Cheryl Youkaim, State Representative for District 46B, and Ron Latz, State Senator for
District 46, will be in attendance to discuss the 2016 Legislative Initiatives and other
priorities.
The City Council reviewed their 2016 Legislative Policy on January 12. The policy is
reviewed and adopted every year in order to communicate the City’s positions on
issues that we would like the Legislature to address.
J
� •� �
_ • '
Cit of Ko kin�
� p
. . .
e Is a Ive o lc
Funding for SWLRT:
• The City of Hopkins supports transit funding for the Southwest Light Rail and the financial
match needed to ensure the line is built.
• The City of Hopkins supports the implementation of funding for transit improvement areas
and urges the Legislature to authorize various funding mechanisms for transit improvement
areas including; tax increment financing, tax abatement, bonding, and general fund
appropriations for a revolving loan program or grant program.
• In addition, the City of Hopkins supports funding for improvements necessary to the 3
transit stations as well as assistance for job loss and tax base for the operation and
maintenance facility being located in Hopkins.
Bonding Bill for Inflow and Infiltration:
• Assist local communities in funding repairs and upgrades to local sewer infrastructure. The
City of Hopkins supports bonding for this purpose.
Local Control:
• No restrictions on local government budgets such as levy limits and property tax freezes.
Redevelopment Funding from Bonding Bill or DEED:
• The City of Hopkins is continuously dealing with cost for redevelopment efforts.
• Redevelopment allows local communities to adjust to changing market conditions, better
utilize existing public infrastructure, and maintain a viable local tax base. However, due to
the high up-front costs of redevelopment, as compared to Greenfield development,
desirable redevelopment projects often require public assistance.
�ity o� �opkins �'��� t�gisla�ive �o�icy - �i
It should be the goal of the State Legislature to champion development and redevelopment
throughout the state by providing enough sustainable funding to assure that the state
remains competitive in a global marketplace. The City of Hopkins supports increased
funding and flexibility in the Metropolitan Council's Livable Communities Programs. It
strongly opposes funding reductions, transfers of Livable Communities Program funds to
other program areas and constrains on eligibility and Program requirements.
In addition, the City of Hopkins supports:
• Increased, flexible and sustained Contamination Cleanup and Investigation Grant Program,
administered by DEED;
• New financing and regulatory tools to nurture Transit Oriented Development, including
increased flexibility in the use of TIF for this purpose.
• Increased and sustained general fund and state bond funds for the Redevelopment Grant
Program, administered by DEED, dedicated to Metropolitan Area projects;
• The evaluation of SAC fees to determine if they hinder redevelopment;
• Expansion of existing tools or development of new funding mechanisms to correct unstable
soils; and
• State adoption of an income tax credit program to facilitate the preservation of historic
properties.
• Revisit the laws on condominium development to see if they are a reason why condos are
not being developed. It is another type of housing that could add to our housing diversity.
TIF:
Tax increment Financing (TIF) has been and continues to be the primary tool available to
local communities for assisting economic development, redevelopment and housing. Over
time, several statutory changes have made this critical tool increasingly difficult to use, while
recently property tax reform has resulted in a decreased state financial stake in city TIF
decisions. At the same time that TIF has become more restrictive and difficult to use, federal
and state development and redevelopment resources have been steadily shrinking. The
2006 eminent domain changes will make redevelopment significantly more expensive in
some cases, and impossible in others. The cumulative impact of TIF restrictions shrinking
federal and state redevelopment resources, and changes to eminent domain laws will
restrict a city's ability to address problem properties and will accelerate the decline of
developed cities in the Metropolitan Area. Without proper tools and resources to address
decline, cities will be unable to stop it. At a minimum, the state should authorize increased
flexibility in local TIF decisions.
�ity o� �opkins �'��� t�gisla�ive �o�icy - �
The City of Hopkins urges the Legislature to:
• Not adopt any statutory language that would further constrain or directly or indirectly
reduce the effectiveness of TIF;
� Incorporate the Soils Correction District criteria into the Redevelopment District criteria so
that a Redevelopment District can be comprised of blighted and contaminated parcels in
addition to railroad property;
• Expand the flexibility of TIF to support a broader range of redevelopment projects;
• Increase the ability to pool increments from other districts to support projects;
• Continue to monitor the impacts of tax reform on TIF districts and if warranted provide
cities with additional authority to pay for possible TIF shortfalls;
• Allow for the creation of transit zones and transit related TIF districts to address
development and redevelopment issues associated with transit or transfer stations;
• Shift TIF redevelopment policy away from a focus on "blight" and "substandard to
"functionally obsolete" or a focus on long range planning for a particular community,
reduction in greenhouse gases or other criteria's more relevant current needs;
• Encourage DEED to do an extensive cost-benefit analysis related to redevelopment,
including an analysis of the various funding mechanisms, and an analysis of where the cost
burden fall with each of the options compared to the distribution of the benefits of the
redevelopment project; and
� Consider creating an inter-disciplinary TIF team to review local exception TIF proposals,
using established criteria, and make recommendations to the legislative on their passage.
• For sites that do not meet the restrictive blight and contamination definitions of the 2006
changes to eminent domain law, the Legislature should explore creating incentives to
encourage owners whose properties meet the blight definitions under M.S., Chapter 469, to
voluntarily sell their land for redevelopment purposes. Incentives could include income tax
credits, capital gains deferrals or other incentives targeted at property owners.
• The City of Hopkins encourages the State Auditor to continue to work toward a more
efficient and streamlined reporting process.
C:ity a� �opkins 1'��� L�gisia�ive �olicy - �
Housing and Commercial:
• The legislature should also re-enact a program similar to "This Old House" which would
allow qualifying owners of single family homes, multi-unit rental properties, and
commercial buildings to defer the increase in tax capacity from repairs or improvements.
This would allow greater flexibility in targeting commercial development and
redevelopment as well as act as incentive for cities to maintain housing stock.
Parking Ramp - Minnesota Statues 216C.20:
No enclosed structure or portion of an enclosed structure constructed after January 1,
1978, and used primarily as a commercial parking facility for three or more motor vehicles
shall be heated. Incidental heating resulting from building exhaust air passing through a
parking facility shall not be prohibited, provided that substantially all useful heat has
previously been removed from the air. This subdivision shall not prohibit a publicly owned
parking facility from being heated to not over 50 degrees, where public parking is (i)
integrated either above or below or both in a facility with public and private uses, and (ii)
where the cost of the desi�n and construction of the public parkin� facility would be
increased above the cost of the design and construction of an unheated parking facility.
�ity o� �opkins �'��� t�gisla�ive �o�icy - �