03-20-2018 Council Work Session Packet

Home Browse Search

July 11, 2016 Mayors and Council Members: For many years, both cities and counties have been working toward reform of the Metropolitan Council. In 2010 and 2011, all seven metropolitan counties, as well as Metro Cities, put together working groups to make recommendations regarding regional governance. While the approaches and recommendations of these two groups have differed, there has been a very persistent and consistent message that reform of the Metropolitan Council is both needed and appropriate. Over the past year, the suburban counties have been working toward establishing a more inclusive group representing cities and counties who reflect the growing consensus that change is overdue. This group has taken a strong position that local control must be a key element of any reform. Towards that end, we wanted to update you on the progress that has been made and the work that remains, and to encourage you to stay engaged in this very important topic. A coalition of local (city and county) government leaders developed a draft resolution, eventually passed by 41 cities and four suburban counties (list attached), supporting reform of the Council. These resolutions set forth principles to guide the process of moving away from our current state-agency/governor-controlled Council to one that provides for local control. Despite the rather chaotic end to the Legislative Session there has been progress regarding the reform movement. Local governments and other stakeholders, working with Legislators, have finally managed to move reform of the Metropolitan Council from the back burner; reform is now being considered and debated seriously within the region, the media, and at the capital. The idea that some type of modification is absolutely necessary is now an accepted and consensus position of nearly every group. Even Governor Dayton and Metropolitan Council Chair Adam Duininck have indicated that they are open to suggestions regarding reform. Now that there is consensus that change is needed, we must begin the more difficult process of finding consensus on exactly what this change will look like. While there is agreement that change is needed, the changes being proposed by others differ substantially from ours— we argue that meaningful reform can only come with local control (local elected officials), while others advocate for minor adjustments that continue the status quo state agency model of governance. It is imperative that over the coming months we expand the coalition of local governments to include business groups, civic organizations, governmental associations, environmental and parks advocates, good government organizations, and others to build consensus in defining a new structure for the Metropolitan Council.