| East Bethel and Anoka County at odds over who can impose HRA levy |
|
|
| Wednesday, 16 September 2009 | |
|
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
Staff writer Housing and redevelopment authorities (HRA) from the city of East Bethel and Anoka County have different interpretations on who can levy East Bethel residents in 2010, so a third party will have to make a ruling. After this edition went to press, the East Bethel City Council met in closed session Wednesday night to decide whether to pursue litigation against the Anoka County HRA, which is planning to impose a $201,339 tax levy in East Bethel for 2010. The total preliminary Anoka County HRA set Aug. 25 is $2,000,856. The city of East Bethel believes its HRA should be the only governing authority able to impose a levy on its residents and city officials believe it followed state law and properly notified the county that it was creating its own HRA that has the power to levy. “The county is obviously aware that we did this. We’ve been talking about it for two years,” Councilmember Steve Voss said. “They’re unhappy that the city is taking on their own initiative to deal with our issues on our own.” The Anoka County Union contacted Tim Yantos, executive director of the Anoka County HRA, to get the county’s side of the story, but Yantos said he could not comment because of pending litigation. The East Bethel City Council Sept. 2 approved the 2010 preliminary budget and levy on a 3-1 vote. When the city sent this certified levy to the Anoka County Property Records and Taxation Department, the city received an e-mail from Maureen Devine, division manager of property records and taxation. The e-mail stated that after consulting with the deputy county attorney, the county determined that the communication to Yantos did not constitute proper statutory notification and thus the county could not accept a certified East Bethel HRA levy for 2010. The council held a special meeting Sept. 9 to re-vote on the 2010 certified levy. The overall 2010 levy of $5,021,373 did not change between Sept. 2 and Sept. 9. The difference is on Sept. 2 the council had included a $126,058 East Bethel HRA levy and on Sept. 9, the council removed this levy and increased the general fund levy by the amount of the former city HRA levy. Besides the general fund levy, the overall levy of $5,021,373 includes a debt service levy of $158,574. According to City Administrator Douglas Sell, the city filed a temporary restraining order request, which would have prohibited the Anoka County HRA from imposing its levy until a judge made a final ruling on the case. However, Sell told the Anoka County Union late Tuesday night that a judge had denied the temporary restraining order. Establishing HRA The East Bethel City Council in July 2008 approved the formation of an Economic Development Authority (EDA) with HRA powers, which it believed would give city officials the power to levy an EDA or HRA levy to help with economic development and housing rehabilitation programs. However, East Bethel later discovered that in order to impose an HRA levy, it needed a separate governing body. Assistant Attorney General Kenneth E. Raschke Jr. of the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office wrote a Feb. 11 letter to East Bethel City Attorney Gerald Randall offering that information, although he emphasized that this was not an official opinion. These opinions can only be given to state agencies or an attorney for the local government body whose powers and duties are at issue. In this case, the attorney who could request an opinion from the attorney general’s office is the Anoka County HRA attorney, according to Raschke Jr. The council May 20 unanimously passed a resolution to form its own HRA. However, the county does not feel it was properly notified as prescribed by state statute. 2010 budget The property tax levy funds a majority of the budget. The preliminary 2010 general fund budget is $5,070,187. The debt service budget is $306,758. Voss was the lone council member to vote no. Councilmember Anne Klein was absent. Voss said he voted no because he felt the council did not make enough cost reductions and the general fund levy includes a $250,152 special levy to make up for some of the losses of Market Value Homestead Credit (MVHC). Residents see a reduction on their property taxes based on the value of their home in the form of MVHC. The state previously reimbursed cities the difference between the certified levy and what was actually collected after MVHC was factored in. However, Gov. Tim Pawlenty’s budget unallotments in December 2008 and in the June 2009 included taking away a lot of these reimbursements to cities to help the state balance its budget. The Minnesota Legislature this past session allowed cities to recover the lost MVHC through a tax levy outside levy limit restrictions the Legislature had imposed in the 2008 legislative session. For now, the council has chosen to levy back all of the combined MVHC it lost in December 2008 and 2009, which equals $250,152. It cannot levy back lost 2010 MVHC until 2011. Eric Hagen is at This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|