Laserfiche WebLink
Regular City Council Meeting <br />Monday, August 17, 2009 <br />Page 14 <br />Mayor Klausing requested that staff prepare preliminary information to proceed <br />with a 2010 feasibility study and 2011 construction for the above-referenced con- <br />struction project; and return to the Council at a later date seeking authorization for <br />such a feasibility study, based on the Chapter 429 process. <br />Mr. Schwartz anticipated that such a request would come before the City Council <br />in the spring of 2010 following staff's research of additional information. <br />Councilmember Pust thanked the neighbors for bringing their request forward, for <br />working together, and working together as problem solvers <br />b. Discussion on the City's 2010 Property Tax Levy Limits <br />Finance Director Chris Miller provided a summary of 2010 property tax levy lim- <br />its, based on recent legislation, and detailed in MN Statutes, Chapter 275.70 and <br />274.74. Mr. Miller addressed two categories: General Purpose representing unre- <br />stricted levy limits, and Special, or restricted, levy limits. Mr. Miller reviewed <br />each levy and their impacts to the community as it began to prioritize its prelimi- <br />nary 2010 budget and levy. <br />Discussion among Councilmembers and staff included implicit price deflator at <br />(0.83%); one-half the percentage of household growth; one/half percentage of C/I <br />market value; allowable special levies to be used for debt service, increases in <br />pension obligations, wages and benefits for police and fire, loss of 2008 MVHC, <br />and loss of 2009 MVHC; additional legislative changes allowing municipalities a <br />one-time provision to levy back for lost aid in 2008 and 2009; various assump- <br />tions in employee union contract arbitration; and how to determine impacts for <br />median value, single-family property owners and taxpayers. <br />Further discussion included how to provide an adequate level of services based on <br />the budgeting for outcomes process currently being implemented, along with <br />other objective data; various perspectives in determining maximum margins for <br />services and programs; property valuation changes that may provide an opportu- <br />nity beyond that normally provided, if those values were reduced and less impact <br />was felt by the homeowner; service versus impacts; and taking advantage of levy <br />issues before the Council, so no additional negative influences are faced by the <br />City in providing realistic and requested service and program levels. <br />c. Continue Discussions on an Alternative Budgeting Process for 2010 <br />Finance Director Chris Miller provided a summary of the Budgeting for Out- <br />comes (BFO) process as detailed in the Request for Council Action dated August <br />17, 2009; and in anticipation of the upcoming presentation by Springsted on .the <br />City's estimated 200 distinct functions, only represented by taxpayer supported <br />funds. Mr. Miller noted that the entire BFO process would take several more <br />months to finalize priorities and make final spending decisions. <br />