My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1987/03/23
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1987
>
Agenda Packets - 1987/03/23
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/28/2025 11:08:41 AM
Creation date
4/28/2025 11:08:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
3/23/1987
Description
Regular Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
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 />U ILJ <br />league of minnesota cities <br />March 20, 1087 <br />-title -fn -in <br />-address <br />-city <br />Dear -title -In: <br />Minnesota city officials attending the meeting with members of the <br />House of Representatives sponsored by the League of Minnesota Cities <br />on Tuesday, March 3 came away from the meeting with a number of <br />concerns. ' <br />It seemed to many of us that the Minnesota members of Congress were <br />telling us that cities are just "another special interest group" <br />pressing them for money for programs of particular benefit to city <br />governments; that cities shouldn't have a direct connection with the <br />federal government anyway; that cities have not recognized the degree <br />of crisis in the federal budget; and that cities should accept <br />federal requirements without complaint. <br />Minnesota city officials were very frustrated by the content and the <br />tenor of the March 3 meeting. We would like to be very clear with <br />our members of the House of Representatives. Cities serve the same <br />constituents as members of the Congressional delegation. Reductions <br />in funding to city governments results *in increased taxes to those <br />same constituents through higher, more regressive property taxes. <br />Our national organization as well as the state league have not <br />blindly sought to preserve city programs with no recognition of the <br />federal deficit. We urged consideration of the deficit question when <br />Congress worked on the tax reform act and we have supported other <br />possible revenue enhancements, as well as expressed concern for the <br />deficit and its impact upon the federal budget. <br />We have also understood that federal program funds involve <br />requirements and we have complied with requirements established by <br />the federal government where we have accepted funding. The <br />government also, however, imposed mandates upon us without making any <br />funding available or withdrawing funding after establishing <br />standards. <br />Examples of such mandates and requirements include manadtory <br />participation in Medicare, forced compliance with the Fair Labor <br />Standards Act, and phasing out wastewater treatment construction <br />1 i33 uruversity avenue east, st. pain, minnesota 551 O1 (612) 227-5600 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.