My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2012_0319_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2012
>
2012_0319_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/6/2012 3:25:52 PM
Creation date
3/15/2012 3:42:12 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
136
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).
View images
View plain text
ExecutiveSummary:StudyoftheMetropolitanAreaFiscalDisparitiesProgram <br />FortheMinnesotaDepartmentofRevenue <br />Foreachjurisdiction,TischlerBiseevaluatedninelanduse-·;m©z;EzÝ;residentialandfour <br />nonresidentiallanduses.Thelandusecategoriesarelistedbelow.Demographicfactorsvaryby <br />jurisdictionandarediscussedineachÒ©z7z-·zxsectionofthisreport.Theseprototypesarethen <br />usedtoanalyzefiscalimpactstothe(a)municipality,(b)county,and(c)primaryschooldistrict. <br />ResidentialLandUse <br />Singlefamilydetachedunit:Highervalue <br />Singlefamilydetachedunit:Medianvalue <br />Singlefamilydetachedunit:Lowervalue <br />Multifamily/Condo(Homestead)unit <br />Apartmentunit <br />NonresidentialLandUse <br />Commercial/Retail <br />Office <br />Industrial <br />Institutional(taxexempt) <br />ThisstudydoesnotintendtobecomprehensiveorexhaustiveidentifyingoverburdensinMetroarea <br />municipalitiesorfiscalimpactsiftheFiscalDisparitiesprogramwereeliminated.Thiswouldbe <br />11 <br />impossibleevenwithunlimitedtimeandfunding.Rather,itisintendedtoidentifythefiscal <br />relationshipbetweenlandusesandservicedemands/costsatthemainlevelsofgovernmentproviding <br />servicesandinfrastructureunderthecurrentFiscalDisparitiesprogramandpotentialfiscalimpactsif <br />theprogramwereeliminated. <br />CostofLandUseFiscalAnalysis:GeneralApproach <br />Foreachcaseexample,costandrevenuefactorshavebeendeterminedbasedonFY2011budgetsand <br />additionalfiscalresearch.Theanalysisisbasedon currentlevelsofservice.Currentlevelsofservice <br />representtherespectivelevelofmÝ;©;·x(City,County,orSchoolDistrict)currentlevelofspending <br />forservicesandfacilities.Thatis,assumptionsmadeintheanalysisarebasedonrevenuesources, <br />programs,services,requirements,andpoliciesthatareinplacetoday(withtheexceptionofthe <br />{Þz·wÒ·FiscalDisparitiest©m©|scenariowheretaxratesareadjustedtoreflecthypothetical <br />eliminationoftheprogram). <br />TheanalysisincludesGeneralFundsandmajorSpecia <br />lFunds,bothoperatingandcapital,foreachlevel <br />ofgovernmentevaluated.Enterprisefundsarenotincludedintheanalysisastheyareassumedtobe <br />11 <br />However,onalocationspecificlevel,thiscouldbedoneasisbeingdoneintheCityofAnoka(seetheGISRDC <br />study)aswellaswasconductedbyTischlerBisein200001. <br />26 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.