1997 Minnesota Statutes

     3.987 Local impact notes for state-mandated actions. 

    Subdivision 1.    Local impact notes.  The commissioner 
 of finance shall coordinate the development of a local impact 
 note for any proposed legislation introduced after June 30, 
 1997, or any rule proposed after June 30, 1998, upon request of 
 the chair or the ranking minority member of either legislative 
 tax committee.  The local impact note must be prepared as 
 provided in section 3.98, subdivision 2, and made available to 
 the public upon request.  If the action is among the exceptions 
 listed in section 3.988, a local impact note need not be 
 requested nor prepared.  The commissioner shall make a 
 reasonable and timely estimate of the local fiscal impact on 
 each type of political subdivision that would result from the 
 proposed legislation.  The commissioner of finance may require 
 any political subdivision or the commissioner of an 
 administrative agency of the state to supply in a timely manner 
 any information determined to be necessary to determine local 
 fiscal impact.  The political subdivision, its representative 
 association, or commissioner shall convey the requested 
 information to the commissioner of finance with a signed 
 statement to the effect that the information is accurate and 
 complete to the best of its ability.  The political subdivision, 
 its representative association, or commissioner, when requested, 
 shall update its determination of local fiscal impact based on 
 actual cost or revenue figures, improved estimates, or both. 

    Subd. 2.    Mandate explanations.  Any bill introduced 
 in the legislature after June 30, 1997, that seeks to impose 
 program or financial mandates on political subdivisions must 
 include an attachment from the author that gives appropriate 
 responses to the following guidelines.  It must state and list: 

    (1) the policy goals that are sought to be attained, the 
 performance standards that are to be imposed, and an explanation 
 why the goals and standards will best be served by requiring 
 compliance by political subdivisions; 

    (2) performance standards that will allow political 
 subdivisions flexibility and innovation of method in achieving 
 those goals; 

    (3) the reasons for each prescribed standard and the 
 process by which each standard governs input such as staffing 
 and other administrative aspects of the program; 

    (4) the sources of additional revenue, in addition to 
 existing funding for similar programs, that are directly linked 
 to imposition of the mandates that will provide adequate and 
 stable funding for their requirements; 

    (5) what input has been obtained to ensure that the 
 implementing agencies have the capacity to carry out the 
 delegated responsibilities; and 

    (6) the reasons why less intrusive measures such as 
 financial incentives or voluntary compliance would not yield the 
 equity, efficiency, or desired level of statewide uniformity in 
 the proposed program. 

    Subd. 3.    Local involvement; laws.  Any bill 
 introduced in the legislature after June 30, 1997, that seeks to 
 impose a program or financial mandate on political subdivisions 
 must include an attachment prepared by the author that describes 
 the efforts put forth, if any, to involve political subdivisions 
 in the creation or development of the proposed mandate. 

    Subd. 4.    No mandate restriction.  Except as 
 specifically provided by this article, nothing in this article 
 restricts or eliminates the authority of the state to create or 
 impose programs by law upon political subdivisions. 

    HIST: 1997 c 231 art 11 s 2