Laserfiche WebLink
<br />State Auditor Report on LGA <br /> <br />Page 3 of3 <br /> <br />can be misleading. Cities that provide services to other jurisdictions have expenditures for a larger <br />population than just their city, so a per capita measure overstates the cost of the service to individual <br />residents. <br /> <br />For example, Alexandria's fire budget is $484,000 but serves four surrounding townships with a <br />population about equal to the city's. The city receives $213,000 from the townships to pay for the <br />services they receive. The per capita cost of fire in Alexandria using the OSA methodology is $52, but <br />after discounting the services provided to township residents is actually $29. Ironically, the OSA <br />report's methodology would punish cities that engage in cooperative service agreements, the very <br />behavior promoted by the current Administration to boost city efficiency. Using per capita expenditures <br />also minimizes the impact non-residents have on service needs in regional centers and the central cities. <br /> <br />The auditor's report is built on several false premises: <br /> <br />. All cities should have relatively similar expenditures per capita regardless of variations in service <br />needs from aging infrastructure or demands from nonresidents. <br />. Services such as airports and transit and libraries, because they are provided by counties or <br />regional governments in some areas of the state, are not essential services anywhere. <br />. Cities that receive a lot ofLGA can slash what is categorized as "non- essential" services, and <br />still expect property taxpayers to continue to pay the same level of taxes for vastly reduced <br />services. <br /> <br />Perhaps most shortsightedly, the report asserts that LGA is "free money" that only benefits the cities <br />that receive it. The reality is that the benefits of LGA flow beyond individual city boundaries to those <br />who work in or visit a city. In addition, LGA ensures the economic vitality of regions of the state with <br />higher needs and less ability to raise property taxes-which benefits the economy ofthe state as a <br />whole. <br /> <br />R~t],lD1JQ_LMGHQm~ <br /> <br />http://www .1mnc.org/main/lmcstory l.din <br /> <br />2/18/2003 <br />