Laserfiche WebLink
General Fund (Continue <br />Intergovernmental reve�ues accountzd for 44.7°� of the revenues compared to 38.9; <br />last j�ear. The increase in intergovernmental rever.ue came primarily from the <br />state homestead credit. The state homestead credit maximum was increased fro� <br />$325 in 1979 to $550 in 1980 per homestead. <br />Iacreases in levels of e�;penditures for majcr functions of the City over the <br />precedino year are shown in the following tabulation: <br />E:�penditures by Function <br />General government <br />Public safety <br />Public works <br />Other <br />Transfers <br />1980 <br />Amount <br />$ 548,129 <br />1,5�8,931 <br />877,155 <br />239,507 <br />32,720 <br />Tota1 esnenditures 53.2�6.442 <br />Percent <br />of Tota1 <br />16.8 <br />47.9 <br />26.9 <br />�.i <br />1.0 <br />100.0% <br />Increase <br />(Decrease) <br />from 1979 <br />$ 40,586 <br />83,119 <br />128,609 <br />58,224 <br />i��L� <br />$ 314,858 <br />Thzse increases in e�penditures did not result frem major new programs buc fron <br />the continued impact of inflation. <br />Assessed valuations of $214,6+8,78% represented a.. incrca_e of 14.�;o over the <br />preceding year. Part of the increase in assessed valuation was due to a court <br />ruling declaring the cencent oT ].i�i_ted market value unconstitutional. To comply <br />with this ruling the 1e�isi �_.,... nc�� : � - - -_'-. ,.., ��n.. .ept d. . �, " �:SC ;nc' <br />1981. <br />The mi11 rates by purpose for �hese iiscal years is as fo1lc�:as: <br />Purnose <br />General Fund <br />Bond and Interest <br />A11 Other Funds <br />Tcta1 Tax Rzte <br />Levy Limitation <br />1980 1979 <br />7.27 8.26 <br />3.24 3.34 <br />2.54 2.12 <br />13.05 1;.72 <br />The Minnesota I,evy Limitations Lac.- was implemented in 7.972 and restricts property <br />tax increases to 8% per capita per year. Since enactmcnt various amendments to the <br />1aw have passed, Uut the basic principles still apply. The City is operating <br />within the authorized levy limitation. <br />riscal llisoarities <br />The State Legislature enacted a Fiscal Disparity Law in 1971 which was not implemented <br />until taxes payable in 1975 due to constitutional challenge. The 1aw provides for <br />the pooling of forty percent of ai1 neco commercial and industrial property valuations <br />in the seven county netropolitan area. In turn, valuations from this pool are to <br />be redistributed to taxing jurisdictions according to specific criteria. Although <br />it is difficult to determine the iuture impact of the Fiscal Disparity Law on the <br />City, the 1aw had the effect of reducing taxable valuation as follows: <br />F7 <br />