My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
gr00090_000038_pg241
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
MNHistoricalSocietyFiles (CC Minutes page-by-page 1958-1981)
>
gr00090_000038
>
gr00090_000038_pg241
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2011 4:18:01 PM
Creation date
4/12/2011 9:55:28 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
Page 1 of 1
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
-6- <br />arbitrators' award for the policemen gave them an 18% increase and <br />Mounds View had budgeted for only 9 %. Another problem is the present <br />court system. In 1974, under the Justice of the Peace system, we <br />had a surplus of $17,000. In 1975, we are going to have a deficit <br />of $15,000. If you spend a bushel you've got to find that buck <br />some place. It has to come from taxes or from services. Mayor <br />Johnson asked for questions from the floor. <br />Mr. Joe Hardinger - 2375 Highway 10 - The Council and you seem to <br />thinkthat the four or five business places in Mounds View should <br />pay for all of these. No one else is being penalized. I can see <br />why there is no new business coming in if you take the attitude <br />that the liquor end should take care of it. You okayed a $2,000 <br />contract to work on Saturday, etc. How can you sit there and allow <br />this to happen. Who arrived at these figures? <br />Mayor Johnson: We took a look at the various sources of revenue <br />which the City has -- permit fees, realty taxes, liquor licenses. <br />How reasonable are they in terms of the services we are rendering <br />and in terms of what other cities are charging in comparable situations. <br />Administrator Achen did this checking and is qualified to do this. <br />Mr. Hardinger: Where did you arrive at the figures? <br />Administrator Achen: The new fees are based primarily upon the cost <br />of services the City is rendering such as police, courts and prose- <br />cution. Since 1973, when the on -sale intoxicating liquor license <br />was last raised, the City's cost for police, court and prosecution <br />services has increased from $159,126 to $285,684. This is an increase <br />of $126,558 or 79.5% in just three years. The additional license <br />fees proposed tonight will generate approximately $10- 11,000 <br />additional revenue. The balance of the increased police, court and <br />prosecution costs is being paid by property taxes. <br />Mr. Hardinger: If I own a gas station, am I not entitled to police <br />protection? <br />Administrator Achen: The establishments affected by the proposed <br />license fee increases all require police protection services beyond <br />those normally provided the single family homeowner. Our police <br />handle numerous law enforcement and security problems at these <br />establishments. We estimate that without the need for such services, <br />two or three less policemen would be necessary. <br />Richard Johnson - 2400 Highway 10. I feel that the apartment <br />buildings take more of the police time than any of the clubs. <br />Mayor Johnson: My only response is that the multiple dwelling <br />units are paying for a portion of the increase through their real <br />estate taxes. How do you come up with a fair allocation? We took <br />what we consider the best shot and arrived at what we have here. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.