Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> MINUTTS <br /> CITY COUNCIL <br /> STJPTEMBrR 200) <br /> There was detailed discussion about the history of LGA cuts and <br /> unallotments. The City Administrator indicated that the City has tried not <br /> to depend on LGA given the history. Ile noted that for 2009 the City <br /> levied the debt levy as a hedge against unallotments. "I'he goal has been to <br /> stabilize levies so that taxpayers do not have a swing from year to year. <br /> The Administrator noted that as it stands right now, the City is depending <br /> on $200,000 in LGA. Without factoring in the $200,000, the City's levy <br /> increase would have to be 12.95%, which is not realistic. 'fhe <br /> Administrator recommended eliminating the debt levy, and putting that <br /> $160,000 into the General Fund. Again, there will be the dependence on <br /> LGA to the tune of $200,000. The Adminisri•ator noted that Option 2 <br /> takes it one step further and protects the City's ability to levy back LGA <br /> cuts. If this is not done, the City will permanently lose the ability to levy <br /> back approximately $49,000 in LGA cuts. <br /> The Finance Director noted that should the State completely eliminate <br /> LGA for Little Canada, the City would have to make up $200,000. The <br /> Administrator noted that the franchise fee the City is collecting is <br /> allocated to the Infrastructure Fund, and that fee is approximately <br /> $200,000 per year. "the Administrator noted that the levy limits placed on <br /> cities this year and last year force a greater dependence on LGA. 1"he <br /> Administrator noted that further unallotments are not out of the questions <br /> for 2009 and 2010. Blesener agreed, noting that the State if running out of <br /> options. He felt that the City had to be very careful this year in protecting <br /> its options when setting the budget given a large State deficit is being <br /> projected for their next biennium. <br /> There was additional discussion on the history of LGA and the <br /> unallotments that have occurred over the past three years. Keis pointed <br /> out that the City is almost forced to levy more since it if doesn't, it loses <br /> the ability to levy the equivalent unallotmcnt. <br /> Blesener indicated that some options may be to eliminate the Fire Marshal <br /> position and/or to cut back on policing services. 1'he Administrator noted <br /> that the City has eliminated some staffing through attrition. Service cuts <br /> may be another option. There was discussion about eliminating or <br /> reducing the extra police protection at Montreal Courts. The <br /> Administrator reported that the deputies have niformed him that this extra <br /> policing makes a big difference in response times iu other areas of the <br /> City. There may also be the ability to share the extra police costs with <br /> Vadnais Heights so they can provide additional coverage at the apartment <br /> complexes along County Road D, but that is not possible for 2010. <br /> McGraw noted that the extra policing at Montreal Courts is more than just <br /> crime prevention, but also improves the quality of life for people living for <br /> the complex. Blesener indicated that he talked with the Montreal Courts <br /> 6 <br /> <br />