CR 93-74 Ordinance Amend City Storm Sewer Code
~-~---~~--- --~~------~---
/' "
. - '" -' , "I Y 0
v ';If:-
. ~
May 12, 1993 Council Report No. 93-74
ORDINANCE TO AMEND CITY CODE
STORM SEWER DRAINAGE UTILITY
Proposed Action.
staff recommends approval of the following motion: Move for adoption
of first readinq of Ordinance 93-723 amendinq Section 720.13 of the
city Code.
Overview.
Council in July 1989 adopted a new ordinance establishing a storm
sewer utility. within the code is a fee structure of nine classes
based on land usage. Property owners have the right to appeal of
classification if they feel their parcel has not been treated fairly.
Since the inception of the Hopkins storm sewer utili ty , Hennepin
county Regional Rail Authority has refused to pay any utility charges
assessed against its property and not until recently has a compromise
been struck concerning classification of their property.
Primary Issues to consider.
o What has been the basis of HCRRA appeals?
o What is the substance of the compromise?
o What are the lost revenue implications?
o Recommendation
SUDportinq Information.
o Ordinance 93-723
Jd:::ss~
Engineering Superintendent
I
-
CR 93-74
_ Page 2
Analvsis.
o What has been the basis of HCRRA appeals?
In July 1990 HCRRA submitted an appeal requesting exemption from
utili ty charges on the basis that County property was street
right-of-way and as'such would be exempt under the city Code. To
absolutely cover its claim of exemption the HCRRA further
requested reclassification of the property as vacant and
unimproved, and thus generating no utility charge.
Staff reviewed the request to offer a compromise and made a
proposal. Of HCRRA's 16 acres involved, 12 acres would remain
Class 3 and pay a commercial rate and 4 acres were changed to
Class 6, a parks designation that pays a substantially smaller
fee.
The County replied with implicit acceptance of the city's
proposal but still appealed the inclusion of their property lying
within public street right-of-way in determining acreage subject
to the storm utility.
The city sought it's attorney's advice on the matter and, in
short, sent a response to HCRRA in March 1991 outlining its
opposition to acreage reduction. The City also indicated its
willingness to forego penalty charges on utility billings that
had gone unpaid since 1990.
The City. received no response and in September 1991 all past
unpaid HCRRA utility bills were treated as delinquent and placed
on the City's Miscellaneous Assessment Roll and eventually
levied. In 1992 no utility bills had been paid and again the
delinquent invoices were placed on the assessment roll of
September 1992. A check of County Treasurer records showed
delinquent tax bills for the amount assessed by the City. The
County clearly was not about to place its property into tax
forfeiture. clearly a settlement had to be reached and a meeting
was arranged this past April.
o What is the substance of the compromise?
City staff and its attorney met with Ken Stevens of the HCRRA and
County Commissioner John Keefe to discuss the framework of the
City's storm sewer utility and to seek a resolution to the
impasse concerning collection of past and future charges. The
HCRRA is especially concerned about land use classification
within the code. because of the County's growing trail network on
former railroad right-of-way and the potential for substantial
charges. The county authority fears other communities could join
Hopkins with their own storm utilities and eventually place a
__ heavy financial burden on it with th~ir own unique charges.
-~-------~
- .
CR 93-74
- Page, 3
The County's chief objection lay in the City's use of Class 6
(Parks) as a designation for 4 acres of its property. There is a
potential for this classification to fall upon additional Chicago
Northwestern right-of-way once the authority assumes storm sewer
charges assessed against that property. Class 6 designation
carries a current charge of $2.25/acre per month. The County has
no objection to the Class 3 designation with a charge of $45/acre
per month on its property between County Road 3 and 10th Avenue
North or the corridor from County Road 3 eastward to the City's
border.
Staff reached an accord with the County by agreeing to amend its
utili ty ordinance to exempt HCRRA property which is currently
trails or part of a trail system or in use for light rail. In
return the County would pay its past charges and continue to pay
into the future a commercial rate on those portions of their
property which are leased out or are available to be leased for
commercial purposes.
o What are the lost revenue implications?
with the city's current billing policy in force the City would
collect the following charges:
, HCRRA property $1139 per month
~ Chicago Northwestern property 579 per month
TOTAL $1718 per month
Using charges based on the compromise and assuming HCRRA takes
full control of Chicago Northwestern property the monthly billing
to the county would be $485 per month. Should the County choose
to lease any portion of the Chicago Northwestern corridor
(currently designated in whole as a trail) for commercial
purposes, the monthly charges would increase accordingly.
o Recommendation
In light of the County's unyielding position in the past to not
pay any storm sewer billings nor to pay for charges that have
become delinquent taxes, staff finds it difficult to recommend
anything other than the proposed amendment to the city Code.
- -
- - - ------------ -------------- - -~------- ~
-~~~- ~~--~~-------~----- ----- -~~--~
..' ,
CR 93-74
Page 4
. HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
'4-,!
ORDINANCE NO. 93-723
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 720.13
OF THE HOPKINS CITY CODE
RELATING TO T~E STORK SEWER DRAINAGE UTILITY
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HOPKINS DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. The Hopkins City Code Section 720.13 is hereby amended
to read as follows:
720.13 Exemptions. Public street rights-of-way, that Dart
of public transportation corridors in use for liqhtrail or
recreational trails and vacant unimproved land with ground cover are
exempt from storm water drainage charges.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance is effective on June 29, 1993.
First Reading: May 17, 1993
Second Reading: June 1, 1993
. Date of Publication: June 9, 1993
Effective Date of Ordinance: June 29, 1993
Nelson W. Berg, Mayor
Attest:
James A. Genellie, City Clerk
.
__________________~J___ ~ ---~------~---------~~-~------~-~----~----~-~--------~------~---~----- ~-----