07-06-1993 WS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

STAFF REPORT JULY 1, 1993 PAGE THREE Those decisions, made with the best of intentions and out of a common purpose to keep Mounds View a small suburban community, ultimately penalized the City as levy limits were imposed by the State. Mounds View's levy base was, in comparison to comparable cities, far below levels necessary to fund basic services and financially meet the changing demands for services and the growing number of "unanticipated" events (LGA cuts, landfills, low interest rates, declining revenues) . Many unanticipated events have forced the City to fund actions (Oak Grove Landfill) by encroaching into an already insufficient fund balance. While the City of Mounds View may be a small city in comparison to Brooklyn Park, Blaine or Coon Rapids, it is not the small City that was once referred to as a "bedroom community" . Mounds View is a smaller Metropolitan suburban community with all the same problems, concerns and issues as any other Metropolitan City. The differences lie only in the degree to which we share common problems, concerns and issues. All predictions regarding the state of local municipal government center on the fact that cities will have to become more financially independent from all but the most internal sources of revenue. The extent to which a City may choose to fund its services and programs internally will, of course, be the decision of each community, but the choices will not be simple ones. The choices will be narrowed each year by external as well as internal forces. Mounds View as well as the State of Minnesota will no longer have the benefit of being insulated from the economic peaks and valleys which are now impacting cities all over the nation. We will be wise to prepare for whatever scenario may play out within the next 5-10 years - and none of the scenarios will include substantial financial assistance from external sources. The vitality of the City, its ability to meet essential, basic and peripheral service demands will depend greatly on some very hard decisions that the Council will have to make. * The cost of maintaining the status quo will continue to rise. If we only "maintain" , we will begin to lose ground to the extent that some things must be replaced because the cost of "fixing" them over and over is not "cost effective" . The City must decide if it is cost effective to go beyond "just maintaining" . * The burden on the property tax system is heavy and the person carrying the burden is about to throw open the window and yell "I'm made as Hell and I'm not going to take it anymore! " However, this is the same person that calls the City to take care of the "deer problem" , or wants the City to come shoot the skunk that