Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />s ille Cit <br />Government Op r ti <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />eral <br />vs. Infl.ation <br /> <br />$7,000,000 <br /> <br /> <br />$6,500,000 <br /> <br />$6,000,000 <br /> <br /> <br />$5,500;00Q : <br /> <br />$5,000,000 -I <br /> <br />2000 <br /> <br />2001 <br /> <br />2002 <br /> <br />2003 <br /> <br />2004 <br /> <br />~' "05 <br /> <br />~-.~-Inflation at 2.50k -II- Maschka <br /> <br />Kysylyczyr <br /> <br />Mr. Maschka claims that a major tax increase is justified for 2005 because taxes w <br />not increased with the rate of inflation in 2003 and 2004. <br /> <br />The chart to the upper right clearly shows that Mr. Maschka's statement is untrue. <br />When Mr. Kysylyczyn led the council through the 2003 and 2004 budgets, taxes 1 <br />General Government Operations was raised equal to the rate of inflation. <br /> <br />When Mr. Maschka led the council through the 2000, 2001 , 2002, and 2005 budg~ <br />as shown in the chart to the lower right, taxes for General Government Operations <br />have risen at double the rate of inflation. <br /> <br />The Roseville council does not have an inflation probh <br />it has a leadership and spending problem! <br /> <br />The following information is based upon the Roseville Finance Department memo titled "Summary of Tax Levy by Fund 2000-2004." Aid adjustments for 2 <br />reflected. The voter approved bond referendum and other bond payments are not included. They are not included because a major portion was approve( <br />voters (not the council), and their repayment has nothing to do with general day-to-day spending habits of the city. State law recognizes this by dividing 0 <br />payments from all other city taxes. Maschka's budget proposal numbers, submitted to the council on 9/9/04, were used to calculate the 2005 budget y <br />