CCP 08-26-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

appropriate stewardship of the financial resources with which it has been entrusted. Having thus reached a level of satisfaction with the district's recent and current financial commitments, the Fiscal Planning Advisory Committee deemed it necessary to turn its focus away from further budget Cllts and began to examine potential means of increasing the revenue available to the district. . After a preliminary review of Minnesota Educational tax law and the processes and formulas used for generating funding within the general operating budget, it became apparent to the Fiscal Planning Advisory Committee that the financial stability and future fiscal security of the district would require either a) an increase in State Generai Education Formula Funding, or b) an increase in local levy funding. Since the Minnesota State Legislature has placed a freeze on the State General Funding Formula for the next biennium, the Rscal Planning Advisory Committee turned its focus on the local levy. In an attempt to ascertain the status of future student populations and to determine the feasibility of increasing revenue without looking at increased funding options, the Fiscal Planning Advisory Committee requested a summary of the findings of the Demographics Committee. Based on the Demographics Committee's report on a continuing trend toward declining student enrollment, the Fiscai Planning Advisory Committee determined the need to look at identifying additional revenue options in order to maintain the current level of programming and service. (See Appendix E) In order to stay away from the financial 'feast or famine" trap that many districts have found themselves in, and in order to avoid the customary threats and scare tactics that many districts have used, the Fiscal Planning Advisory Committee made the intentionally cognizant decision to determine the district's financial needs based on a value-based . funding approach. The Fiscal Planning Advisory Committee generated a list of programs, services, and values that are essential to the Roseville Area School community. (See Appendix F) When the cumulative beliefs and values generated by the Fiscal Planning Advisory Committee were juxtaposed to our Districts MAST (Money, Achievement, Satisfaction, Technology) goals it became obvious that to maintain the ievel of student achievement and community satisfaction that the Roseville community has come to expect from Roseville School District, increased revenue was necessary. District Assistant Director for Finance and Budgeting, Barb Anderson, presented several different scenarios based on enrollment projections and referendum dollars. It was determined by the Fiscal Planning Advisory Committee that the scenario that made the most financial sense was the scenario which would maximize our levy capacity by going to the public and requesting an additional levy of $222 per weighted pupil unit. The additional levy will Increase the general fund by almost $1.8 million annually. At this point the Fiscal Planning Advisory Committee requested a summary of the tax implications that their proposal would have on the Roseville community. At the April 4th committee meeting, John Maas of Springsted Inc. presented the proposed tax implications that the increased levy would have on the Roseviile homeowners. Mr. Maas presented the data which demonstrated a minimal tax increase. (See Appendix G) He presented the tax implications for $100,000, $160,000, $200,000 and $500,000 houses. Mr. Maas alsc discussed the operating referendum that Roseville currently has in. place and discussed Its termination date.