My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
04-14-2011 Charter Packet
LinoLakes
>
Charter Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1981 - 2021 Agenda Packets - Charter Commission
>
2011 Packets
>
04-14-2011 Charter Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2021 12:44:24 PM
Creation date
9/1/2017 10:59:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Charter Commission
Charter Meeting Type
Regular
Charter Document Type
Packets
Supplemental fields
Date
4/14/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
�.. NOTE: BELOW IS THE PROPOSED CHARTER VERBIAGE ETC. FROM KAREN <br />MARTY, DECEMBER 2010: <br />Tax Cap Amendment <br />Section 7.13. Levy Limitations. The levy limitations imposed on the City by Minn. Stat. <br />Sections 275.70 through 275.77 (2010) shall remain in effect even if the statutes are <br />amended or repealed. The references in Minn. Stat. Sec. 275.71 to taxes levied in specific <br />years shall be interpreted to refer to taxes levied in the year this amendment passes and <br />each subsequent year. <br />Comments: <br />There are a number of ways to impose a tax cap. Mounds View and Fridley adopted <br />detailed charter provisions, attempting to classify each fee or charge as included or <br />excluded from the limit. Probably as a result, those provisions of their charters have been <br />amended repeatedly. Lino Lakes could follow their model, but would have to figure out <br />precisely which taxes and fees to include in the levy limits, and which to exclude. Those <br />decisions would almost certainly become political, and take a great deal of time to <br />complete. Instead of opening the floodgates that way, the language proposed above <br />simply adopts the provisions currently in effect in state law. The City is already living <br />with these limits. These state laws do allow the voters to approve increases, and so <br />provide an option for the City to increase its levy. These state laws also contain provision <br />which will allow the City to deal with emergencies, thus providing the necessary safety <br />net. The language proposed above will keep these same limitations in place indefinitely. <br />Draft Ballot Language: <br />Should the City Charter be amended to permanently adopt the levy limits that are <br />currently imposed by state law? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.