Continued: Plan to lighten city's budget

A new street lighting fee proposed by Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak last February has hit the desks of a City Council that will need to make an election-year decision on whether to use it to help balance the city's 2010 budget.

Rybak proposed the fee, which would cost the typical residential property owner about $20 a year, to offset part of the city's loss of state aid that threw this year's budget out of balance. The council last winter balanced this year's budget without the fee and pushed off a decision on it until next year's budget. Now that decision point is nearing.

The proposal pits the city's tightening financial situation against the political risks of imposing a new fee on property owners during a recession and in an election year.

The fee is designed to raise $3 million to pay for electricity and bulb replacement for the city's 46,700 residential-area wooden poles, metal poles in business areas and parkway lights. The proposal would be expected to offset $3 million of the $4.6 million in general fund cuts that the city's Public Works Department has been directed to make for 2010. Those cuts are driven by the $21 million in cuts to state aid to Minneapolis for 2010 announced in June as part of Gov. Tim Pawlenty's state budget-balancing unallotments.

The city department has warned that the alternative to proposing the fee is limiting the hours lights are on or cutting back on repairs. It is just beginning to experiment with "smart lighting" systems that save more energy.

More Minnesota cities are considering street lighting fees. But Star Tribune checks of 10 suburbs bordering Minneapolis on Tuesday found only Brooklyn Center imposes a similar lighting fee, charging almost $13 per property annually.

"It's something we're going to be looking at in the future," said Jay Hartman, public works director for St. Anthony. Edina also is considering a lighting fee, while Richfield's City Council has directed that one be adopted, with an expected cost of about $24 annually. Some cities also charge lighting fees in selected areas where residents petitioned for added lighting.

The Minneapolis proposal faces several hurdles, according to Sandra Colvin Roy, who chairs the council's Transportation and Public Works Committee.

One is that residents will have difficulty distinguishing this fee from one nixed by the council early last year because of adverse public reaction. That fee was up to eight times higher for homes than the current proposal, and would have included the cost of installing ornamental lights across the city. "This is strictly to keep the lights on," Colvin Roy said.

Some residents will tell the council to pay for lighting some other way, while some council members will prefer a bigger property tax hike to avoid a new fee, she said. The fee would appear as an assessment on tax bills.

The $20 estimate for a typical lot is based on a 40-foot-wide lot. Residential owners would pay about two-thirds of the $3 million, while other property types would pay the rest. The underlying rate for all property types is expected to be about $4 per 1,000 square feet, but only the first 165 feet back from the street would be included. The charge probably wouldn't be tax-deductible on federal and state returns, the council was advised.

Some council members expressed a preference during Tuesday's committee meeting for alternative methods of calculating the fee -- for example, basing it on the amount of light received or the property type. But they were told that legal precedents and administrative ease argue for a uniform charge based on property area, at least initially.

The council opted last winter against adopting a revamped 2009 budget that counted on the fee because there was enough political uncertainty over how the proposal would fare that some council members didn't want to risk a $3 million budget hole if it proved too unpopular to adopt. Their argument then was that a fee ought to be adopted before Rybak proposed a 2010 budget relying on it.

The decision on whether to adopt an ordinance imposing the fee is scheduled for Aug. 14, with the adoption of the fee itself slated for an Oct. 2 vote.

Meanwhile, the city is installing a pilot "smart light" system on the renovated Marquette and 2nd avenues, but with enough central capacity to handle additional expansions. Such systems dim lights during low-use periods and report lights needing maintenance. They also feature improved on-off controls.

Steve Brandt • 612-673-4438

SOUND OFF

Minneapolis residents have three city-sponsored events this month to discuss a proposed ordinance imposing a street-lighting fee:

COMMUNITY MEETINGS

Tuesday, 6:30-8:30 p.m., Farview Park, 621 29th Av. N.

July 16, 6:30-8:30 p.m., Martin Luther King Park, 4055 Nicollet Av. S.

PUBLIC HEARING

July 21, 9:45 a.m., Transportation and Public Works Committee, Room 317, City Hall.

OTHER COMMENT

Phone a comment to 311 or e-mail streetlightfee@ci.minneapolis.mn.us

HOW MUCH?

A hearing on the amount of the proposed fee is tentatively scheduled for Sept. 22. Public Works has recommended a rate of about $4 per 1,000 square feet of benefited property. Typical charges at that rate would be approximately:

Single-family home (5,000 square feet): $20 annually

Apartment building (8,750 square feet): $35 annually

Office-retail (12,500 square feet): $50 annually