Laserfiche WebLink
<br />4t <br /> <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />-- <br /> <br />24 <br />25 <br />26 <br />27 <br />28 <br />29 <br />30 <br />31 <br />32 <br />33 <br />34 <br />35 <br />36 <br />37 <br />. 38 <br />39 <br />40 <br />41 <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Response: The private sector must be required to pay a greater share. of the <br />improvements that benefit their industry. The public sector should not be expected to <br />underwrite the costs of improvements sought by the private sector. The state and federal <br />government must participate in adequately funding the mitigation of the negative impact of <br />railroads on local government and its citizens. The federal government must exercise <br />greater over-sight of the 8TB to ensure fair and equitable solutions are reached when <br />dealing with cities in Minnesota. <br /> <br />IMPROVING SERVICE DELIVERY <br /> <br />SD-l. Redesigning and Reinventing Government (GC) <br /> <br />Issue: Every level of government is re-evaluating, reprioritizing, redesigning, and <br />renewing its organizational structure and programs in response to fmancial realities and citizens' <br />needs and problems. Reforms, however, must be more than change for the sake of change or a <br />reshuffling of existing programs to appease the electorate. To be meaningful, reorganization and <br />reassignments of governmental entities and services should save money where feasible, deliver <br />improved services, serve essential needs, and be equitably structured. Cities have and will <br />continue to pursue the use of cooperative agreements, the re-evaluation of city programs and <br />services, and changes to organizational structures. <br /> <br />Response: The federal, state, and county governments should: <br /> <br />· Ensure that in redesigning, reinventing or reassigning government services and <br />programs that the appropriate level of service to citizens is evaluated and citizen <br />demands and expectations are adequately addressed. <br /> <br />· Promote local efforts through incentives, rather than mandates. <br /> <br />· Communicate and establish a process of negotiation before shifting responsibility for <br />delivering services from one level of government to another or seeking to reduce service <br />duplication. <br /> <br />· Transfer authority for use of revenues dedicated to such programs, or provide <br />appropriate and adequate alternatives. <br /> <br />· Identify and repeal programs or discontinue services that are no longer necessary or <br />which can readily and fairly be provided by the private sector. <br /> <br />· Employ existing government entities in redesign efforts rather than create new agencies <br />or units. <br /> <br />SD-2. Unfunded Mandates (GC) <br /> <br />Issue: The cost of federal and state mandated programs substitute the judgment of <br />Congress, the president, the Legislature, and the governor for local budget priorities. These <br />mandates force cities to reduce funding for other basic services or to increase taxes and service <br />charges. The passage by the Legislature of reporting requirements for new state mandates, and <br /> <br />21 <br />