My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-20-1996 WS
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
02-20-1996 WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 4:46:31 PM
Creation date
7/25/2018 7:05:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
2/20/1996
Supplemental fields
City Council Document Type
City Council Packets
Date
2/20/1996
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
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL <br /> 411 PAGE TWO <br /> JANUARY 26, 1990 <br /> 2. A collaborative review of proposed TIF <br /> projects involving the cities, County and <br /> School District(s) . <br /> 3. As limited on the amount of property value <br /> that can be captured by a City for TIF <br /> purposes. Included in the discussion on <br /> this issue are the following items, <br /> . recognition of differences in values, <br /> land use and growth among cities . <br /> . growth of cap as property values grow. <br /> . turnback of tax value to County and <br /> School District(s) if cap exceeded. <br /> As the Ramsey County and St. Paul lobbyists describe <br /> it, "the train is already out of the station. " If we <br /> wish to protect our interests, we must work together to <br /> come up with a proposal that the Legislature will <br /> accept as an alternative. That is the goal of our work <br /> • group. In the meantime, I recommend that we take a <br /> position of urging the Legislature to make changes to <br /> TIF in a manner that will not unduly limit any city's <br /> authority and to recognize that TIF is the only tool <br /> left for economic development. <br /> B. Comparable Worth - In the words of Senator Freeman, <br /> ".. . .there will be changes. . . " to the Comparable Worth <br /> Law. The only question is, "How onerous will these <br /> changes be?" <br /> proposal from the Department of Employee Relations <br /> (DOER) to amend the Pay Equity Act. The flaws in the <br /> proposal and report are quite clear, but the <br /> Legislators I have talked to or heard from at hearings <br /> do not seem to be concerned about them or are confused <br /> by the complexity of the issue. Essentially, the DOER <br /> proposal comes down to an either/or analysis. <br /> If the DOER proposal to pay all employees using a <br /> "combined line" system with all employee groups <br /> represented on the line is made less, collective <br /> bargaining will cease. You cannot bargain wages when <br /> the level of compensation for one group is dictated by <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.