Laserfiche WebLink
18. This paragraph E is superfluous. Section 7.12 refers to emergency debt <br />certificates the issuance of which are totally governed by statute. See Minn. <br />Stats., Sec. 475.754. <br />19. This limitation on reserves should be considered most carefully. Neither <br />statute nor this Charter authorize them but they are commonly created and <br />maintained and Moody's (and to some degree Standard & Poor's) place <br />great weight on a City's reserves in assigning credit ratings. My feeling is <br />that Moody's would not look favorably on this provision (or indeed on the <br />whole proposed amendment). <br />20. The first two sentences are superfluous. There can be no reserves of tax <br />increment and nothing here affects development agreements. <br />21. This subdivision is superflouous. Bond obligations may not be impaired <br />under any circumstances, and bonds may not be issued for current expenses. <br />See Minn. Stats., Section 475.52, Subdivision 1. <br />22. This subdivision merely states a fact and is superfluous. Also, the term <br />"referendum" should be "initiative". In addition, this whole amendment <br />contradicts Chapter Section 5.01 which precludes the use of initiative and <br />referendum in matters involving levy of taxes. <br />23. There should be an effective date that allows the City administration enough <br />time to adapt to these new limitations if adopted. <br />I hope this is helpful. <br />Please excuse the extraneous marks on the draft. <br />293823A DJK W210-4 <br />