My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
10-13-2011 Charter Packet
LinoLakes
>
Charter Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1981 - 2021 Agenda Packets - Charter Commission
>
2011 Packets
>
10-13-2011 Charter Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/27/2021 12:58:55 PM
Creation date
9/1/2017 11:19:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Charter Commission
Charter Meeting Type
Regular
Charter Document Type
Packets
Supplemental fields
Date
10/13/2011
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
COUNCIL MINUTES September 12, 2011 <br />APPROVED <br />181 wouldn't necessarily guarantee that it will remain valid. So it begs the question of why should you <br />x-\182 add the language? The Commission's authority is narrow and is laid out in statute. Another issue <br />183 raised is about creating authority for the Commission to get into the public information area, a job that <br />184 is given to the city council by state statute. He questions if a charter commission can create authority <br />185 for itself. Charters are generally speaking constitutions designed to decide how a city operates and <br />186 not how the Commission operates. Mr. Langel noted that he also has a concern about the amendment <br />187 dealing with granting use of public funds. The language implies that the council cannot do what it is <br />188 responsible for doing unless it provides equal funding to the Commission. While the Commission <br />189 representative has indicated that that language is intended to get the two bodies to work together, Mr. <br />190 Langel fears it would have the opposite effect in keeping the work from getting done. The language <br />191 also seems to imply that there are always two sides to an amendment; the fact is that neither side <br />192 cannot advocate. If there is an issue about the past and a goal to prevent it to happen again, the <br />193 answer wouldn't seem to be a charter amendment but a rather to find a process whereby the groups <br />194 will work together. The mayor confirmed that the Commission has had the opportunity to review <br />195 Mr. Langel's written comments. <br />196 <br />197 Terri Heaton, Springsted, financial advisor to the City, indicated that she would be reviewing her <br />198 written comments regarding the proposed Chapter 7 charter amendment. As financial advisor to the <br />199 city, it is her job to consider the city's ongoing ability to finance its operations and meet debt <br />200 obligations as well as meet ongoing capital needs. She has looked at the proposed levy limit language <br />201 (to continue a levy limit for this city) using 2010 rates. Currently, the city has reacted to the reduction <br />202 in its tax base by reducing its levy. The current state limit would actually allow the city to levy higher <br />---.,203 than it is proposing. By locking into a low year, the city may put itself in a different position than <br />204 other cities in how it can respond when the economy comes back. Another portion of the proposed <br />205 amendment deals with special levies and she noted that many are not funded from tax base and <br />206 melding them into a tax cap as the proposed amendment seems to do is unclear. Another item <br />207 includes restriction of special levies to a vote process and she sees that could limit the city's <br />208 flexibility, an item that is a key area that credit agencies look at. She noted that she sees credit <br />209 agencies comparing cities more for rating purposes these days, looking at flexibilities for instance, <br />210 and they are changing ratings much more than in the past. The city should also consider the <br />211 systematic replacement of infrastructure and maintaining the ability to do replacement at the most <br />212 effective time. Ms. Heaton also expressed that the amendment is confusing in that it uses the term <br />213 "net tax capacity" but Minnesota cities do not use mil rates so that term doesn't make sense with <br />214 current law. There was discussion about tax increment financing and that it is a tool that is being <br />215 used by many cities and very effectively for development. A city's tax base grows when the tax <br />216 increment capture period ends. Regarding the proposed amendment, it would allow the city to use tax <br />217 increment but without the same advantages as other cities in that the increment is pulled away from <br />218 the development. She pointed out that the council should consider the possibility of a negative impact <br />219 on the bond rating, that sending more matters to voters is costly in terms of special elections and that <br />220 the city's long term sustainability could be challenged by tying hands to a rate at an economically low <br />221 time. When the mayor asked if there is a "good" way to do a tax cap, Ms. Heaton responded that <br />222 citizens should be confident that they are getting the best value for their tax dollar and there are ways <br />223 for the council to know that. <br />224 <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.