HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980 November� 1
By Carl Carlson
Public Works Director
Several services now provided by the
Public Works Department probably will
have to be reduced or eliminated if the
tax referendum fails to be approved by
Cottage Grove voters.
Inspections of trees on private
property would be cut and free
firewood delivery would be
discontinued. Trees that present a
hazard in city parks would be cut down
and left in the park, rather than be
hauled away for disposal.
Spring Cleanup Days probably
would have to be eliminated. The work
is done on Saturdays and the men are
given a day off at another time. This
comes to a total of 44 working days or a
cost of approximately $3,000. This
service has constituted quite a saving to
the homeowners as it would cost the
homeowners who use the service about
$25 to have their trash man pick up
their unwanted articles.
In the Parks Department, we would
have to discontinue some of the
mowing. Our policy at the present time
is now to mow 50 feet behind the homes
in open, passive park areas and the
entire parks where there are
playground equipment and athletic
areas. We would have to eliminate the
open area mowing and cut back some
on the developed park mowing. The
number of free skating rinks would be
reduced and the maintenance of the
hockey rinks curtailed somewhat. Our
summer help program would be
reduced, thereby cutting down on the
ballfield maintenance.
In the Road Department, the
roadside mowing would be cut to
mowing the top shoulder only and that
done only once a year. The seal coating
program which currently calls for every
street in the city to be sealcoated every
five years would be extended to seal
coating only once every eight years. At
the present time, it takes our people
about 12 hours to get everything
cleaned up after a snowstorm. If we
could not keep replacing our equipment
when necessary and add more
manpower as the city grows, it would
get to a point where it would take us
from 15 to 20 hours to get the plowing
done. The street sweeping program
r
fails
also would take much longer to get
done if we can not purchase another
sweeper. We are presently running
behind with this program as we have
added so many new streets and still
only have one sweeper, the same as we
had 15 years ago.
The free manure pile and the garden
plots would be other programs that
probably would have to be cut-
�)
N
N �EOo
� a o
•
X1'1 !l l I [Rallit il ill
The City Council's decision to budget
$73,000 to add three police officers to
the present staff was a major factor in
the Council's action to put the tax
referendum on the ballot.
While demands on the police force
have increased with the population, the
police staff has been reduced in recent
years. In 1976, 20,, police personnel
handled 14,540 contacts. The number
of contacts increased to 16,500 in 1979
and is expected to reach 17,500 this
year, but the number of police
personnel has been reduced to 18. In
1976, the city had three CETA- funded
officers and retained only one when the
federal funding ran out, resulting in a
loss of two officers.
Public Safety Director Bob Oszman
said some reductions in police service
already have been made and more will
be necessary without increased
personnel. He pointed out, however,
that response to emergency police calls
will remain at its current high level
regardless of the outcome of the
referendum.
Oszman said the Department has
discontinued its service of checking the
homes of residents who are on
vacation. He said some crime
investigation work has been dropped
because of insufficient manpower.
Delays in responding to non'
emergency calls will result without an
increase in manpower, Oszman said.
While response time was between five
and 10 minutes in the past, it now
ranges from 30 minutes to an hour for
non - emergencies, he said. Some
investigations now handled in person
by police officers will be handled by
telephone, Oszman added.
Cottage Grove voters will decide the
future level of city provided services by
their votes November 4 on the local tax
referendum.
A yes vote will allow the city to levy
up to $300 per year above the
regular levy base to maintain city
services at the present level and to
make certain improvements. A no vote
will bind the city to its regular levy and
will mean reduced city services.
The ballot question asks "Do you
want the City Council to be able to
increase the levy limit base by $16.19
per capita ?" Although this would allow
the city to levy an additional $300,000
per year, the City Council has decided
that $105,000 will be sufficient for 1981.
That amount could increase up to the
maximum of $300,000 in future years.
Because the City Council was
required to make its 1981 levy in
October, the City Council levied
$105,000 over the current levy limit has
in anticipation of a positive vote on the
referendum. If the referendum fails,
alterations in the budget will need to be
made.
Cottage Grove's tax levy for 1981 is
$1,751,202, including the $105,000 over
levy, and is $230,260 higher than the
1980 levy of $1,520,942. The increase
includes $73,000 to hire three additional
police officers, $55,00 to purchase
an additional street sweeper, $12,650 to
purchase a tractor for the Parks
Department and additional funds to pay
increased personnel costs and to meet
increased expenses caused by inflation.
Articles printed elsewhere in this
newsletter were prepared by Mayor
Roger Peterson and other city officials
to explain in detail what the referendum
will cost individual property owners,
why it is being proposed and what it will
mean to city residents.0
Cottage Grove residents may be
wondering just how much the proposed
increase in the tax levy limit will cost the
individual property owner in real estate
taxes.
Based on levy limitations and
increased aids, including homestead
credit, overall property taxes have
declined on the average of $200 to $250
in 1980 and the decline will continue in
1981 for many houses. The tax increase
resulting from an additional $105,000
levy is difficult to predict, according to
Mayor Roger Peterson. In some cases it
will mean an increase, while in other
cases it will mean a smaller decrease.
The following chart shows property
tax increases that would result from a
levy increase of $105,000.
Many property tax payers will
receive a further reduction from the
circuit breaker refund, which is based
on income. Typically, property tax
payers with lower valued homes benefit
more from the homestead credit, as
shown on the chart. Those with higher
valued homes benefit more from the
circuit breaker refund, which is filed
with Minnesota income tax forms. o
1961 Increase
Assessed
Market
per year
per $105,000
Homestead
credit
Actual
Annual
Actual Monthly
Value
levy
reduction
Increase
Increase
$40,000
$10.95
-$6.35
$4.60
$0.39
45,000
12.60
-7.31
5.29
0.44
50,000
14.25
-8.27
5.98
0.50
Average 55,000
16.35
-9.48
6.37
0.57
,Average 60,000
18.45
-
18.45
1.54
65,000
20.55
-
20.55
1.71
70,000
22.65
-
22.65
1.89
75,000
24.25
-
24.25
2.02
Many property tax payers will
receive a further reduction from the
circuit breaker refund, which is based
on income. Typically, property tax
payers with lower valued homes benefit
more from the homestead credit, as
shown on the chart. Those with higher
valued homes benefit more from the
circuit breaker refund, which is filed
with Minnesota income tax forms. o
t
By Mayor Roger Peterson
In explaining why the city needs
additional flexibility in its levy
capabilities, one has to look at the
history of the city in its state- controlled
ability to levy taxes and the growth that
has occured in that time period.
Since 1971 the city has been
restricted to raising its levy by 6 percent
per year over the previous year's levy.
The 6 percent is based on dollars levied
in 1971 and has nothing to do with value
The proposed levy base increase is
$300,000, but the City Council only will
levy an additional $105,000 in 1981.
The first -year levy of $105,000 is
basically to increase the police
department's effectiveness. It includes
hiring three additional officers,
purchasing a four- wheel -drive vehicle
and a noise testing machine and
restoring several training and public
safety programs.
Future use of an increased levy base
more general and cannot be outlined
specifically without detailed study by
the citizen advisory commissions and
City Council. However, certain needs
exist and can be listed in general terms.
The fire department needs additional
volunteers and full -time personnel and
equipment to enable it to adequately
provide daytime fire protection. The
parks maintenance department needs
additional personnel and equipment to
mow and maintain the parks, ballfields,
skating rinks and open space in the city.
In recent years, maintenance has been
decreased considerably, causing
complaints from neighbors and users
of the parks. Road maintenance and
snow removal has nearly kept pace with
expansion, but double digit inflation
and difficulty in replacing old equipment
soon will cause deterioration in this
service.
Other areas such as recreation
programs, youth service, paramedic
service, animal control and
administration will have to be reviewed
in light of whether or not the
referendum is passed. Without
passage, all programs will suffer and
some may be eliminated. o
of property. The 6 percent also is only
for that part of the budget financed by
property taxes, which amounts to only
about 40 percent of the total revenues
of the city.
From 1971 through 1979theincrease
in the general property tax levy of cities
allowed by the state - imposed levy
limitation has been 65 percent. On the
cost side, the Consumer Price Index
increased 88 percent. However, data
compiled from a sample of 15 cities
shows a city cost -of- service increase
index of 108 percent. In dollars, this
means that for every $100 of revenue
collected through property tax in 1971,
cities can now collect $165, but, for
purchases costing $100 in 1971, the
same quantity now costs cities $208.
Expenditures
The types of expenditures used to
calculate the cost increases included
the base salary of a policeman,
firefighter, heavy equipment operator
and top secretary as well as various
energy needs, materials such as sand,
gravel, blacktop, paper and paint, and,
finally, capital expenditures for squad
cars, dump trucks, pickups,
typewriters and fire trucks. All of the
increases were calculated on a unit
basis rather than quantity needed in
1971 versus the quantity needed in 1979
and only for materials or goods that
cities needed to buy to maintain a
service. For example, the cost per
squad car in 1971 was $2,800 and in
1979 was $6,800.
Cities have been able to cope with
the great difference in property tax
revenue versus actual cost increases in
a number of ways. Federal Revenue
Sharing funds are now commonly used
for the general fund rather than specific
purposes. The federal government has,
in the past few years, subsidized cities
for the salaries of some new employees
to provide jobs and training for the
unemployed. Cities like Cottage
Grove, with a growing population, have
been able to utilize new tax dollars from
new people to pay cost increases for old
and current service levels. Finally,
many cities have actually reduced or
severely curtailed the levels of some
services. Cottage Grove has used all
these methods. However, the future
will be much more difficult. Federal
Revenue Sharing will probably remain
at the same level or decrease, which
means we can no longer count on those
increases and the employment training
programs have been discontinued.
Population growth
Continued population growth will help
pay some current cost increases but
will not provide enough revenue to
increase services to handle the new
growth at the current levels. Also,
because of two existing tax laws, the
addition of commercial or industrial
growth does not provide enough new
tax dollars for services these activities
need, but do tend to lower property
taxes for the rest of the city.
To date, we have trimmed in all of our
departments so that no service has
been drastically affected. It takes a little
longer to plow all the streets or to fix all
the potholes. Not all open space is
mowed and what is maintained is done
less frequently. Our public safety
volunteer programs have increased
significantly. Our recreation programs
have been decreased some and fees
charged for other city functions have
been increased to cover more of these
costs. We have reached the limit of
costs. We have about reached the limit
of these kinds of cost savings.
Cottage Grove's share of the total
property tax paid by a business or
homeowner is about 20 percent or $200
of $1000 paid. Yet, the strictest
limitation for revenue growth has been
imposed on cities. It is always
unpopular to talk about increasing a
tax, even one or two percent. But if this
flexibility is not allowed in the near
future, Cottage Grove will experience
serious service delivery problems.❑
It t i t t I
x'' per t
A yes vote will mean services will
remain at or above the current level.
N® no El
vote will mean a reduction in
services.
Due to strict levy limitations, the
growth experienced in Cottage Grove
and some increases in state provided
property tax aids, the city property tax
on an average house has decreased
over the last few years.
Along with the tax decreases have
come a slow decrease in city service
ability. A recent survey taken in
Cottage Grove indicated that an
overwhelming majority of people would
be willing to pay slightly more in taxes to
maintain a good level of service or, in
some cases, increased service.
One example of the need to upgrade
service is in the police department.
Occasionally, because of manpower
constraints, we have only one
patrolman on the streets to handle calls
from our nearly 20,000 residents. This
situation may have been acceptable
when the city population was 12,000 or
13,000, but causes problems today. In
1976 and 1977 we had three additional
police personnel funded by federal
programs, but they were eliminated in
1978 and 1979. It is imperative that we
take up that slack locally now to
provide the necessary safety for our
residents.
First
We can do this in various ways. First,
we could drastically reduce the
capability of another department by not
purchasing capital equipment and
By Carl Meissner
Clerk /Administrator
Who wants to pay more taxes?
Residents of Cottage Grove will be
asked to vote on the question of a tax
levy at the general election November
4. A positive vote on the referendum
will mean higher real estate taxes for
some property owners, although others
actually will have lower taxes because
of the change in valuations.
The question on the ballot is worded
"Do you want the City Council to be
able to increase the levy limit base by
$16.19 per capita ?" The City Council
believes it is necessary to increase
spending in order to provide the
services they think you, as taxpayers,
want. The $16.19 per capita would
mean the city could levy an additional
$300,000 per year.
The Council believes that the full
$300,000 is not needed at this time, but
would like to be able to raise it to that
amount in the future if necessary. The
Council already had to make its 1981
levy and decided to levy $105,OOOover
the current levy limit base. This over -
levy was made because the City
Council believes that residents do not
want less services but at least the same
level of services now provided. The city
cannot continue to give its residents
these services within the current
budget restrictions.
Since 1971, the city has had to live
within a 6 percent levy limit set by the
state legislature. This does not mean
that we can levy an additional 6 percent
of the total budget year. If it did, I know
we could have existed. It means that we
can levy only 6 percent over the
previous year's levy on real estate
taxes. This amounts to 40 percent of
the total city's operating budget. The
remaining 60 percent of the city's
operating revenue comes from sources
other than real estate taxes.
The over -levy of $105,000 will mean
an increase of $5.67 per capita or
approximately $24.25 per year on a
home valued at $75.000. If you want the
same level of services or somewhat
better services, I would suggest that
You vote in favor of the levy limit
increase. If you do not want better
services and want to see the services
deteriorate, then vote against the
referendum. o
reducing employees. As an example,
we could forego buying street
sweepers and snowplows and hiring
employees to operate them. This would
further reduce our ability to maintain or
plow snow from streets but could
provide needed police protection.
Secondly
Secondly, we could borrow money
by selling short term bonds to purchase
capital equipment but would end up
spending 30 to 40 percent more
because of interest payments. This
would only partially solve the problem
by providing barely enough to upgrade
one department while the others
continued their slow decline.
Finally
Finally, the people could pass the
referendum which would provide the
flexibility for the City Council to
upgrade areas in most need and
maintain a high quality in others at the
same time.
Citizen's choice
The choice is really up to the citizens.
The elected representatives can either
be given the flexibility to provide an
adequate level of health, safety and
welfare service or be given the task of
juggling cuts in various services. The
City Council is on record in favor of
hiring three additional patrol persons
for the police department. Without a
positive vote on the referendum, we will
be forced to utilize costly short -term
financing and further downgrade
another service, ❑
/i
M