01-14-1985 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

DS-2. HOUSING (B) In 1981, 1982, 1983, and 1944 the Legislature enacted several allocation plans which divide bundfiig authority between cities in the state. Because of increased needs and abilities of cities to conduct local housing bond programs, the current allocation to cities in inadequate. In addition, the Leageu recomwends that the competitive system administered by MHFA he changed as follows: 1) 1he procedures and deadlines for rc ?:ing an allocation should he better publicized to cities by publishing notice in -lie state register and other means. 2) 100 percent of the loans should be reserved for t;,e first six months for families and individuals with incomes below 80 percent of the maxir.l.m family income. 3) only projects vhich will receive municipal sewer and water services should he eligible for financing;. 4) Cities which have not received an allocation in the past two year. (with the exception of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Duluth) or cities which have loin[ programs =honld receive preference. 5) If all factors are equal, and there are more programs than chore are funds available, programs should be selected by lot. 6) The non -bond proceeds criteria should be eliminated because it encourages inappropriate "bidding wars" among cities and because it tends to favor new construction projects over existing housing and rehab projects. 7) The state law regarding the review of housing plans by RI)Cs or Metropolitan Council should be clarified to expedite the review process. 8) The league supports the continuation of state income tax exemption of interest or. mortgage revenue bonds. 9) MHFA should be required to reserve 100 percent of its bond program for six months for applicants below the 80 percent of the program income limits, and comply with other limits imposed on local programs. 10) M111A should be required to submit its multi -family bonds issue to the city in which the development is located for review and approval. The MHFA project should he consistent with the city's multi -family bond policy and the project should be reviewed by the Metropolitan Council or by the city's regional development commission. DS-3. MUNICIPAL. SFRVlCL DISTRICTS (B) The League supports legislation which would allow cities to create municipal service districts. Cities should be allowed to finance the types of improvements listed in M.S. 429.021 (relating to the construction, replacement, and maintenance of such things as streetR, sidewalks, gutters, storm and -35-