Laserfiche WebLink
once ag in begin contributing more than was contributed the <br />previous ear. A contribution of over fifteen percent of tax capacity <br />is excessi �e and onerous. <br />• Legislatiol that would amend the current fiscal disparities law to <br />allow citi� to retain increases in fiscal disparities due to inflationary <br />growth. ities could use this new source of revenue to provide or <br />maintain ffordable housing, and to develop other related programs <br />such as i proved transit. <br />. <br />provides <br />At the s <br />policy e. <br />restrict c <br />(MUSA). <br />the Legi <br />disparitie <br />� that would bring the fiscal disparities program in <br />' ce with the region's growth policies. The current fiscal <br />program rewards development in outlying areas and <br />' disincentive for development in areas of higher density. <br />� e time, the seven county metropolitan region's growth <br />j ourages higher density development and attempts to <br />velopment outside the Metropolitan Urban Service Area <br />These two policies are in conflict. The MLC believes that <br />� ature should develop a mechanism to make the fiscal <br />� policy consistent with the region's growth policies. <br />I) LOCAL OPTIC)�N REVENUE SOURCES <br />The MLC supports leg <br />city services. The Leg <br />impact fees, user fees <br />attempts to eliminate � <br />option revenue sourc� <br />additional revenue for <br />property taxes. <br />>lation that would provide more flexibility for cities to fund the cost of <br />;Ilature should give cities more local option revenue sources, such as <br />and additional franchise fees. The MLC will oppose any legislative <br />r divert franchise fees on cable television from cities. These local <br />s would provide local governments with the flexibility to generate <br />city expenditures and would reduce local government reliance on <br />J) TRANSPORTA�TION FUNDING <br />The MLC supports a . <br />plans for transportatiorl <br />a fair and equitable revj <br />funding; (2) a new fq <br />population areas; and <br />Minnesota needs a s�4 <br />manufacturing, tourisrt <br />systems that can deli� <br />co�mprehensive transportation funding package that considers and <br />at�d transit needs well into the future. This legislation should provide <br />nae collection system, and would include: (1) an increase in highway <br />ula that would distribute more highway dollars for high density <br />(3) adequate funding for efficient metropolitan transit systems. <br />nd roadway system to remain economically competitive in agriculture, <br />i and general commerce. It needs efficient and affordable transit <br />r people to and from employment locations. <br />