Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
1987-03-02 CC Agenda/Packet
CITY OF ALBERTVILLE a ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: 497-3384 COUNCIL AGENDA MARCH 2, 1987 I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF'THE AGENDA III. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES IV. COMMUNITY FORUM 7:05 ` Gary Matz --Attorney for Jones Intercable do Shirely Hettwer--Representative for Rite Cable --Discussion regarding the tranfer of Rite Cable to Jones 7:30 LeRoy Berning--Barthel Construction --Preliminary Plat review and request to set hearing for plat approval 7:45 Vern and Ed Hackenmueller--Request for the Council to consider blacVtopping the road in front of the store 8:00 • Ron Andrea --Request to set Public Hearing for lot subdivision 8:15 Eugene Valerius--Fire Department/Lion's request to install VCR/Color TV in City Hall for training use V. DEPARTMENT BUSINESS a. Administration - Income Recieved/Bills to be Paid - Extra Office Assistance (Budget Item) • - LMC Legislative Action Conferenc--May 10, 1987 • - Board of Review has been scheduled for May 5th at 7:00 p.m. • - Minnesota Commuinty Improvement Program --March 12th at Hanover - Dog Complaints - Other Business b. Legal - Approval of Ronay's on Main Liquor License transfer (8:30) - Bid Opening and Lease Agreement for the rental of the Farm Land out at the Wastewater Treatment Facility - Other Business c. Engineering - Feasibility Study for Street Repairs/Letter from Springstead regarding possible funding sources - Other Business d. Maintenance • - Overtime Calendar for February VI. MEMBERS' REPORT VII• OTHER BUSINESS • - CITIES BULLETIN for February 14-20 and February 21-27 (you will recieved the lastest one Monday evening) Make our City........ Your City We invite Home, Industry, Business COUNCIL AGENDA PAGE 2 • - March Calendar The Munch Box VIII. MOTION TO ADJOURN COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 2, 1987 The regular meeting of the Albertville City Council was called to order by Mayor Loretta Roden. Members present included Gary Schwenzfeier, Donatus Vetsch, Don Cornelius and Bob Braun. Others present included Maureen Andrews, Barry Johnson and Gary Meyer. There was a motion to approve the agenda. The motion was made by Gary Schwenzfeier and seconded by Don Cornlius. All were in favor and the motion carried. The minutes of the February 17th meeting were discussed and approved on a motion made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Gary Schwenzfeier. All were in favor and the motion passed. Ms Shirley Hettwer, a representative of Rite Cable Company and Mr. Gary Matz, local council for Jones Intercable were here to discuss the transfer of ownership of Rite Cable Comapany to Jones Intercable. Ms. Hettwer first reviewed what Rite Cable is currently working on in Albertville. She explained that the Buffalo office will be maintained with the same staff after the transfer of ownership occurs. The Council was informed that Rite had been marketing in Albertville for about 16 days and that once a committment to hookup to cable there is a 3 day lead tiem before the cable is installed. The Council discussed with Ms. Hettwer their concerns regarding the re- storation work and installation work in Albertville. It was pointed out that in several instances dirt has been spilling over into the street and not being properly cleaned up properly. The Council's concern is that if there would be a heavy rain that all that dirt will run into the storm sewer. It was also suggested that the installation crews could be a little more polite and take the time to do the work right. Mr. Gary Matz next address Jones Intercable and the sale. He explained to the Council that there had been a decision made that Jones would like all the cities effected by the sale pass a resolution supporting the change. Mr. Matz gave the Council some background information on Jones Intercable, stating that it is the 13 larges cable company in the United States and that they are aware of the construction complaints and problems that the City has experienced recently. He also explained that materials had been presented to the City explaining in more detail how the company works and what the City should expect to see as the result of the sale. Mr. Matz had provided Gary Meyer and Maureen Andrews with a copy of a COUNCIL MINUTES PAGE 2 resolution approving the sale of the sale. Gary Meyer had had an opportunity to review the resolution and made the following changes: INSERT I: WHEREAS, Jones has agreed to be bound by the terms and conditions of the agreement. DELETE I: and-tfa@t-Rite-�e-Ret-�R-d@€@dot-eRd@�-@R�-@€-tfae Gary's reasons for deleting the the statement regarding default is that at this time it does not appear to be any default but there could be some instances that the City Council may not be aware of that would be considered default. Mr. Matz understood what the City Attorney was getting at but wanted to stress to the Council the Jones is not interested in buying a potential lawsuit from Rite Cable therefore feeling it was inportant that the default clause remain in the resolution. After a rather lengthy discussion it was decided that the default clause would be deleted and the the City would forward a letter to Mr. Matz stating that at this time we do not know of any default but reserve the right to claim default if restoration is not properly completed or that something at a later date is brought to the attention of the Council. In addition, Mr. Matz agreed to have Jones Intercable forward a letter to the city stating that they agree to the changes made to the resolution. There was motion made by Gary Schwenzfeier and seconded by Don Cornlius to approve the resolution with the changes discussed pending the City of Albertville recieving the letter from Jones stating that they agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the Rite Cable permit. All were in favor and the motion carried. There was also some discussion relating to the Cable Board. It was explained that each city should have one representative attend the meeting and that the group meets the 2nd Wedunday of the month. Other issues discussed included the complaint that the system is hazy in some areas, that apart- ment buildings need to have a right of entry signed by the owner of the building before the Cable company can come in and make the cable connection. No action was taken on these items. The Council approved the license tranfer from Heidelberg Inn to Ronay's On Main, pending Bill's signature on the transfer. All license fees had been paid up at the time of the_ eeting. The motion was made by and seconded by A0 lam; c; Ui (A All were in favor and the motion carried. Gary Meyer asked the Council to make March 24th "DON BERNING DAY" in appreciation for his 35 years of service as City CI-erk. In addition, it was suggested that the City submit his name for WCCO's Good Neighbor Award for the same day. And finally make Don the Honary Clerk/ Treasurer for the City of Albertville. A motion to this order was made by Don Cornelius and seconded by Donatus Vetsch. All were in favor and the motion carried. COUNCIL MINUTES PAGE 3 The Council was informed that the City had not recieved any bids for the renting of the farm land north of the Wastewater Treatment Facility, and therefore is under no obligation to readvertise the land. If someone shows any interest in the land the City can enter into an agreement with the party. It was suggested that anyone knowing someone who might be interested in renting the land should contact that person to see if they would like to rent it at this time. LeRoy Berning of Barthel Construction was present to request that a public hearing be set on a preliminary plat approval for Barthel Manor--2nd Addition. The proposal is for 18 residential lots on land owned by Barthel between 50th Street and 51st Street. The Council was informed that the plan had been before the Planning Commission and that a public hearing had been set for March 26, 1987. There was a motion made by Donatus Vetsch and seconded by Gary Schwenzfeier to set the public hearing for April 6, 1987 at 7:30 to give preliminary plat approval to Barthel Manor--2nd Addition. All were in favor and the motion carried. LeRoy also asked for the Council's opinion on moving the park land north to allow for one row of houses on the north side of 51st Street. It was decided that this proposal would need to be treated the same way as the proposal last year, meaning that the land would need to be appraised and assessments would need to be looked at, along with property tax information. In addition it was decided that the Planning Commission and the Park Board need to be involved with the discussion before any type of discussion could take place. Other items that needs to be looked at is the enginnering aspects of the land as well as what best serves the residents of the entire City. It was agreed that there would be a joint meeting of the Planning Commission and the Park Board with LeRoy to look at the project and that the two Boards would come back to the Council with their recommendations. Gary Meyer reminded LeRoy that he would need to get the abstract before the public hearing so that he would have an opportunity to review them before. Ed Hackenmueller was present to discuss with the Council the possiblity of blacktopping the road that runs in front of the store and whether or not the City of Albertville would be willing to share in the cost. Barry reviewed with the Council what earlier feasibility studies had shown as possible cost for blacktooping to the end of this property. The estimated cost figured to be between $8,000.00 to $9,000.00. Ed feels that the tax money the store puts into the City that there should be some help in improving the street. It was pointed out that in earlier discussion that if the City shared in these cost that it would be setting a precedent for future development along the freeway right- of-way, but that if decided that there would be some committement to the project that it would have to be because of the Wastewater Treatment Facility. COUNCIL MINUTES PAGE 4 Don Cornelius stated that he felt that we neede to look at what is expended on maintaining that road, with gravel and grading. A good reason to have the road blacktopped would be that it would cut down on the maintenance problems to that section of road. It was suggested that Barry contact some of the contractors to see what types of cost we would be looking at for improving that section of the road. It woas also suggested that it might be possible to tie the project with another one to drop the cost down. The records should show that no action was taken on the matter at this time. A public hearing was set for Ron Andrea for April 6, 1987 at 8:00 for approval of a lot subdivision. The motion to set the hearing was made by Don Cornelius and seconded by Bob Braun. All were in favor and the motion passed. There was a motion made by Gary Schwenzfeier and a seconded by Don Cornelius to approve the Lions and Fire Department's joint purchase of a TV and VCR to be installed in the City Hall for training purposes. All were in favor and the motion passed. There was a motion made by Donatus Vetsch and a second made by Don Cornelius to approve the bills. All were in favor and check 7756 through 7780 '— were approved. Charles and Audrey Axels from Otesgo Township were present to discuss the possibility of contracting with the City of Albertville in the area of dog catching at the request of Councilmember Gary Schwenzfeier. They explained how they work their business and what types of options the City might have if the City was to contract with them. It appeared that there may be some interest in exploring the options in more detail and that it should be carried over to another meeting. Maureen next reviewed with the Council the League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Conference on March 10, 1987. If anyone was interested they were to contact Maureen so registration could be included when Maureen sent the form in. The date of the Board of Review appears to be acceptable so no change would be requested of the County. There was some discussion regarding office help for Maureen. No action was taken at this time and different options will be reviewed at a later date. Barry had prepared for the Council a Feasibility Study on what roads need to be repaired and a priority schedule for road maintenance. In addition, Maureen had recieved from Springstead a letter discussing possible funding options that the City would have available for making these improvements. No action was taken on the matter so that the Council would have an opportunity to review the materials before any discussion took place. COUNCIL MINUTES PAGE 5 Ken Lindsay's overtime calendar was reviewed and discussed. It was decided to hold the approval of the overtime until next meeting at which time Ken will be requested to be present to discuss some over- time items. Gary Schwenzfeier asked if the warming house could be locked up since there is no ice left and therefore no reason that people be in the warming house this late in the season. It was agreed that Ken should get a lock for the door and close it up for the season. Gary Schwenzfeier also brought up the Christmas Turkeys for Ken and Maureen. No turkeys were given at Christmas so Maureen was told to pick up two now. Eugene Valerius asked to have Ken check to see if the street signs for the new areas have been order and get them up so that in case of an emerency the Fire Department will be able to find where they are going. There was no other business so there was a motion to adjourn. The motion was made by Gary Schwenzfeier and seconded by Don Cornelius. All were in favor and the motion carried. �QwL¢Pn lav�l : w� CAE-6 Lld�,�,u�at/Clenh-, ADRIAN E. HERBST DANIEL D. THUE GARY R. MATz Tom TOGAS DIANE M. SCHMIDT REESE E. CHEZICK HERBST & THUE, LTD. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2030 NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431.1178 February 19, 1987 Ms. Maureen Andrews City Administrator Box 131 Albertville, Minnesota 55301 RE: Jones Intercable Our File No. 87-0022G Dear Maureen: TELEPHONE (612) 835-2434 Nva, I (Lb� OA eL� 4::, IL As we discussed, I have enclosed certain documents regarding Jones Intercable for your information. The enclosures include the 1986 Annual Report and a book describing the ownership structure and cable television experience of Jones Intercable. I believe this information will provide you and the City with the necessary information regarding Jones Intercable. I look forward to meeting with you on Monday and discussing any further questions that you might have. As we have discussed, I hope that with the information enclosed and our meeting on Monday that the City will be able to grant the necessary approval at its meeting of Monday, March 2, 1987. Maureen, I hope the enclosed documents will provide you the necessary information. I look forward to our meeting on Monday. GRM: 1 Encl res cc: Barbara Hyndman Verytrulyyours, trcwlGary R.atz HERBST & THUE, LTD. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2030 NORTHWESTERN FINANCIAL CENTER 7900 XERXES AVENUE SOUTH ADRIAN E. HERBST BLOOMINGTON, MINNESOTA 55431-1178 DANIEL D. THUE GARY R. MATZ Tom TOGAS DIANE M. SCHMIDT REESE E. CHEZICK February 26, 1987 Ms. Maureen Andrews City Administrator Box 131 FEDERAL EXPRESS Albertville, Minnesota 55301 RE: Jones Intercable, Inc. Our File No. 87-0022G Dear Maureen: TELEPHONE (612) 835-2434 I want to take this opportunity to thank you for meeting with me last Monday to discuss the qualifications of Jones Intercable, Inc. Based upon our discussions, I understand the City will consider granting its approval on Monday, March 2, 1987. I will plan on being at that meeting which I understand is scheduled to begin at 7:00 p.m. I have enclosed, for your review and information, a resolution which we request the City adopt for the purposes of authorizing and approving the transfer of the Extension Permit to Jones Intercable, Inc. I have provided to your City Attorney, under separate cover, a copy of this resolution and have indicated to him that I would be most happy to visit with him regarding any questions or concerns he might have regarding Jones Intercable, the resolution or the process in general. Maureen, should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. I will plan on being in attendance at the meeting on Monday. Very t my yours, ar R. tz GRM:dl Enclosure cc: Barbara Hyndman RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER OF AN EXTENSION PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, MAINTAIN AND EXTEND A CABLE COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the City of Albertville has granted an extension permit (hereinafter "Permit") to construct, operate, maintain and extend a cable communications system within the City to Rite Cable Company of Minnesota, Ltd. (hereinafter "Rite"); and WHEREAS, Jones Intercable, Inc., a Colorado corporation has agreed to purchase the assets of the cable communications system of Rite; and V; WHEREAS, Jones Intercable, Inc. and/or one or more of its affiliates (hereinafter "Jones") has requested the City to approve the assignment and transfer of the Permit from Rite to Jones; I NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY AS FOLLOWS: 1. The assignment and transfer of the Permit to construct, operate, maintain and extend a cable communications system from Rite to Jones is approved and confirmed by the City effective upon the date of the sale of Rite's cable communications system to Jones. 2. In the event that Jones desires to grant a security interest or interests in any or all of its rights, duties and obligations under the Permit and the cable communications system to its lender or lenders as may be designated by Jones, the City hereby consents to such grant of such security interests. 3. The City hereby certifies that the Permit is in full force and effectz-a4wl--that-mite is not in-def-ault under any- of -the - term $€rmit . Passed and approved this day of 1987. CITY OF ALBERTVILLE By Its By Its be ar,d Ccndiiione 01 -�+v aC E -. a t� J R C9 a O c 01 tQ 01 ° c E ° E "C E�.S^'3 E�viao.c IE y (Oj O 00 v M°`°'c E c Sao 3 c LU E s �e3r�ua O � V. C ° = oci00 v o�.°c 0 E- Q TWO 01 ., . •.. go y O1 .' c �'� Ol •0 o y ct« EuEN01oE1 O�t°o�i^LU 3 daE^s aOOys�o1 oyi as ° uiE .0 E d fA a0EE0„ ��oE,c2'7o ZZU,:: W=.E U w OC w 1i w x d V c�01EQ0 �o°out Q >� �O E '5 o oEo�wu 0* E ° ° c E, 03.2 a w O O y Z °;,o`1E� Z v U � u a >go Er E- - 0 w A w x U 00 Z U x w C w 0 y o0 � u,u u � O C C N .Q 0 0 «y 10 ^t O d E '° « wu °0 « c u O Ol y pj C 01 oE�Es� « c 3 c o��01i0a-� 1= � c —0 of t u Ira y CJ 01 mSEod.w Ems« « y vi Iwo cg: 0uev� m z 3 0 H "1, 11 H I C � u E 'E E 0 u E o C �a I E W ZO.oa� Z .-i C C U H y^ ° u c G1 01 "'o t/1 ` cugoo 018y� Ez U=uE (J)aOiOFt- Q �. 01 7 W > c � ..' E 'v Qs�E « E W ao gy�a Q o '•v rt a. w ter, y cn rn M .0C o'�?? n a -i ma--n c`ccn Xa>w�.cn anC C�< a: Lo La w N o rn N c rri n o M, M O o C� �• ? z A- c Z v? co o m -� D rrico = coo N lw A `c a-Gz�z m z o rn C w w < rn (1) cn rm coo v,' ¢• O -4 No �oD .• �-- c<= C�0 A o d = c.o c w d�c = w`c ° �� ? o n Can .� '� w rn = 0, (7 O 3 rn Q) ' ' c n = a Z cn -M cn cr C �c .. 14C n ,� W Z D D x �o cn �? '< o .� .; rrn m= Z ro M O W w f 0 70 p w 4 a`^o-w o w o <_ o r c=o �' n o Z c rn . "CC < ..� d c a• °i = _' =° D C7 coo Z ' i rn _ c gin' rn o= C .. rn o rn 0 rn n c 0)�� to w co La rri (/� a w p Z �- � w �• co. � cn �. � �o �• v Q- o = m � r � ern- �' .`n w ,w.« � to ,� rrn, A Z w w = < T M '� _ M ow w w O w CL cz. o- o 0 0� 3 0 0 w e U,' A wo�� �oYS'g� o3c0 v�xZ�<Z o2 w rn w •o r O 0 coo 0 m c w w m, co Z w A�f0torn �'+ �cm �o3trn o +-► Y D w 3 —1 c ca o717 cMc=a�rn ='��O 3c,Q.oc�iZ .14 La e�y � n (f) rn ?? O, '� Q A w O ,•••1 Z a-�rn 'C R7 rt w VW o a O (A 0 oft 2) cr M C CO CO O d m m � z M Q U_ a)a E m mcn c.uiLO troo E U o Q m LLE w pUW o pr/ w w z U z Z Qac� c .i m N f� 2 •�jy O c N N �U Q N N fn O r C� fC L.L to UO O U� U O CO _ COwU C $ O 9N�> �� ^�� F-C7Um�m o,ZZm m o °� 25F- `a'��pZ �j O m x wLU wZ Ox�>�zQ wM 7 F m c^ZZ w E--a m�? c- �z E¢' m <ui Zzz- wZv a ro0a Z 0a Ew E o ZZ E �_ a�i="=Z— ., 6 mQF 0 cnU w����o0 V ~U~ 2U(m� aQmQ o ' o� �V ��Cz7Xm�c� �YQYJYUY(7(n�Jad�JY�Y�QV 0z 0: � Yd Z 2U(nl—mHQ NM V In cD I�aD00 rN('7 �t� (°f� N W Or NM V �O CD rrrrrr .-rrr NNNNNNN rh N m(D �N M NN N Cl) MMCl) � 000aooa000�o �n �o �o in �o �o �o io �omm��o �nmmm AAA A A A A W W W W W W A V m N A W N N + O O m V J O T T V m U l A OD V--V �- VW ' ' ' ' ' ' a -Iw r<c�mnnTM 8 �x�fx�ixff7c om�c�xf<�cz��c �c��c a m a (n o (n Z Z Z m. �3 Z oOm0<=���N ��o`o�mV� D��zD>K Z ZC�O�� =(7w ZZZZo. � gQ7 Z2 �c0 S.^ Q 3' C) � T(n ©vn� mOO m O < !DGZ�=S. Oalo(Dz j = ¢� -0 C � xO nc3�ax �mBm8'�0.8A d8A ��m imwO NZ(TD 6i Om -0 3 Zs< ZD N 0 5w< i7N p O_(D 00 Oc o 6� ID C— m N O Z N Rl A _ m m y a a 7r (i P1 n 3 m as 3�. �0.•2 c o m m'^ �- ^ '11 C 7 2 p_ O cZD D CD CD N fAN C n=mom m b 6wc �� m aNad l l T�Q'IDD W r U) v �w 3337 Rm`��Nm� p� �w O c0� O O N x ... T a m c m 3 S W b N 2 za8o m CD �- a6 T d (T Z� N n h m = !+y O � o y o WORK ORDER NO. WORK DESCRIPTION JOB APPOINTMENT DATE DATE RECEIVED APPOINTMENT TV& TIME RECEIVED RECEIVED BY SUBSCRIBER ACCT.NO. WORK ORDER TYPE WORK ORDER DATE MANAGEMENT AREA NAME SYSTEM NO. LOCATIOWSALES ROUTE ADDRESS DISCONNECT TYPE DISCONNECT DATE STREET NO. SALESMAN STREET NAME MARKETING CODE CITY PAY SERVICES TYPE CHARGE TYPE CHARGE TYPE CHARGE STATE ZIP CODE $ $ $ HOME PHONE BUSINESS PHONE INSTALL DATE TYPE s s s NO. OF OUTLETS ADDITIONAL OUTLET CHARGE $ $ s P 'LEVEL LEVEL BASIC SERVICE RATE $ s s TYPE BILLING CYCLE FRANCHISE $ $ $ WORK ORDER COMMENTS CHARGES INSTALLATION DATE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT DATE INSTALLED START TIME STOP TIME INSTALLER NO. SIGNATURE SERIAL NO CONVERTER D No. DEPOSIT RENTAL s s s s s s TOTAL AMOUNT RECEIVED >T OUBBCAIEHRS I IGMTLFE CU MAENTS White Copy - Office • Yellow Copy - Installer 0 Pink Copy - Subscriber CITY OF ALBERTVILLE ALBERTVILLE, MINNESOTA 55301 PHONE: 497-3384 INCOME RECIEVED MARCH 2, 1987 BARTHEL CONSTRUCTION $ 663.90 STATE OF MINNESOTA (VIDEO GAMING REFUND) 30.00 BUFFALO MEMORIAL HOSPITAL 63,956.25 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY (REV. SHARING) 271.00 RONAY'S ON MAIN 332.00 REGISTERED CLOSERS 7,830.00 UNIVERSAL TITLE INS. CO. 1,272.63 TOTAL 74,355.78 BILLS TO BE PAID MARCH 2, 1987 UNITED TELEPHONE 63.44 WRIGHT CO. AUDITOR/TREASURER (DEED RECORDING) 10.00 WRIGHT CO. AUDITOR/TREASURER (SHERIFF'S CONTRACT) 1,688.12 OLSEN CHAIN AND CABLE CO._ 97.02 MN DEPARTMENT FO REVENUE --COMPLIANCE DIV. 138.95 NSP 1,546.46 MINNEGASCO 243.40 MAUREEN ANDREWS 535.47 MAUREEN ANDREWS 85.00 KEN LINDSAY 629.52 KEN LINDSAY 85.00 LORETTA RODEN 113.33 GARY SCHWENZFEIER 80.00 BOB BRAUN 75.00 DONATUS VETSCH 85.00 DON CORNELIUS 65.00 PERA 133.42 FEED —RITE CONTROLS 101.45 ACE LOCK AND SAFE CO. 51.00 MEYER—ROHLIN (MAPS) 12.00 TOTAL $5,838.58 Make our City........ Your City We invite Home, Industry, Business To City Council City of Albertville Albertville, Minn. 55301 Beth - MT C� DARRELL WOLFF Wright County Sheriff BUFFALO, MINN. 55313 REGARDING: Monthly report DATE: Feb. 20, 1987 Dear Council: Enclosed is your monthly report for January, 1987. A total of 93 hours were worked for the month. Your billing is as follows: January, 1987 -- $ 1,688.12 DW:dl enc. Yours truly, X- c-2 te- f-1 Darrell Wolff Wright County Sheriff Him 12-fEB-W CFS14 JUR1S: 21 PRIMARY 1SN'S ONLY: NO ACIIVITY GUIE/ DESCRIPTION URID 9010 SPEED 9010 SPEEO 9031 SrW SIGN Y120 SNOWBIRD 9120 SNOWBIRD 9120 'NOWBIRD 912D b7MIRD Y120 SMTWOIRU 9120 SNUWBIRU 9120 SNOWBIRD 9120 SIOWBIRO Y221 EXPIRED REGISTRATION Y233 FAIL fO STOP FOR SCHOOL BUS 9302 LOST ANIMAL. 1NSTALLAULIN NAME --ilkIMT CO. SFFJtIFF LeT- PAGE # t # t t i E N F 0 R S CALLS FOR SERVICE SUMMARY BY UOC/MOC - ALL 01/01/8/ nft 01/31/87 OFF INCIDENT SEQ TIME DALE PER"/ LOCATION 1 NO NO OCC f0YORTED BUSINESS NAME PERSONS CALLING IN COMPLAI 1I-M ALBERTVILLE VILL 2/8 87953768 1 0350 01/01/87 KUJAWA, STEVLN JAIES TI-MA ALBERTVILLE VILL 285 87954648 1 2110 0l/06/87 STORCK, KELLY AM 1I-MA ALIIEKTVILLE VILL 1" 87951868 1 2113 01/17/87 HOLMAN, JEFF ALLAN 1I XualTViLLL VILL 299 8795M 1 0310 01/08/87 SN#" CAR RENIAL 11-fA ALBERTVILLE VILL 299 37954083 1 0319 01/08/87 HE11ELBEWAR, RONAY MARIE TI-fA AL!#RTVILLI_ VILL 299 87954097 1 0331 01/18/87 BARKLEY, DOLORIS EILEEN TI-FA ALBEIRIVILLE VILL 299 81954098 1 0337 01/18/87 NECK, IWASA MARIE TI-M ALBERTVILLE VILL 299 87951870 1 0245 01/19/87 KREN1, ARTRJR RAYMOND JR II -MA ALLEMILLE VILL 299 81951875 1 0346 01/21/8i CROCKArRELL, JAMES LEE T1-MA AL.BERTVILLE VILL 299 87954081 1 0303 01/08/81 BLOCK, MICHAEL JOHN TI-MA ALBERTVILLE VILL 2" 87954099 1 0343 01/18/8i VALETRIOS, KEVIN RALPH TI-M ALBERTVILLE VILL 276 8i954874 1 0120 01/25/87 MCCANN, ROBERT HOWARD 0 ALBERIVILLL VILL 267 81001013 1 1551 01/27/87 DON'S BUS SERVICE 0 ALLUTVILLE VILL 241 87000859 1 1500 01/23/8-1 BARTHEL, JEFF 049 12-FEI1-87 INSTALLAIION NAPE--ifflf#f( CO. SHERIFF DEPT- a S14 JURIS: 21 4 4 4 4 4 4 __rgIwY ISN'S Lm-y: NO E N F 0 R S CALLS FOR 5EAVICE StN4 MY by UOC/MOC - ALL 01/01/87 nft 01/31/87 ACTIVITY LUEJ OFF INCIDENT $EQ TIME DATE DWIPTION GRID LOCATION 1 NO NO OCC REPORTED 9468 0 ALILRIVILLE VILL H & R ACCIDENT 9600 911 AIBERTVILLL VILL r IRE CALL 9800 0 ALBB VILLE VILL PUBLIC PEACE `/807 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL TRAFFIC/PARKING 9920 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL ALARM '1920 0 ALBE711VI11E VILL Y9'10 0 ALBEk1VILLE VILL ALARM 9943 0 ALBBIVILLE VILL SUSPICIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES 9945 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL MISCELLANEOUS fNFOtmfION 9945 0 ALB&TVILLE VILL MISCELLANEOUS I•NFU MATION A3254 eb-a/e.� 19'4�0 ALBERTVILLE VILL ASLT 3-SUB5fANTIAL I& -HANGS ETC -OLD+ A5351 a,1_0Q/� a ALBERTVILLE VILL ASLf 5-INFLICTS Al (S ARM-HANGS-AULf-FA A5351 eA4t/ 4 0 ASLT 5-INFLICTS ATfEMP S F:iPt-W4)W'-ADD T-FA ALEeIVIL LE VILL M880 �L7yeJ 911 AIBEERTVIL LE VILL 3BSENI fY-MS-0BSCE E MW CALL-U+K AUD PERSON/ BUSINESS NAME 278 87000960 1 2200 01/23/87 HAkRING10N, IERRY R06BT 299 87000689 1 2253 01/18/87 MARX, CURT 278 87000946 1 2021 01/25/87 BELIT", LAURIE 276 87001M 1 2140 01/19/8) VET9A, TOM 278 87000563 1 0824 01/15/87 FERN, LEMIS 87000768 1 0749 01/21/87 JOINT WATER POWER 262 87001053 1 1759 01/28/87 IS1KIWI, 262 87000544 1 16I2 01/14/87 CITY OF ALBEk1VILLE 290 87000603 1 1313 01/16/87 ZACHMAN, GEPARD 267 87000968 1 1140 01/26/87 ZACHMAN, %V" 267 87000295 1 1430 01/08/87 267 8Y000295 2 1430 01/08/87 267 87OWZ95 3 1430 01/08/87 L♦� 298 87001031 1 0350 01/28/87 MEYETtS, SARA HL10 12-FEB-87 1NSTALLA1100 NAIE—IRIGHI W. %01FF LENT- r_ CFS14 JURIS: 21 t t t t t+ "RINAkY ISN'S ONLY: NO E N F 0 R S CALLS FOR SERVICE SLlMARY BY UOC/MOC - ALL 01/01/87 rft 01/31/87 ACTIVITY MIL/ OFF 1NCIDW SEA TIME LIAIE DESCRIPTION GRID LOCATION 1 NO NO OX REPORTED P8110 .4 L GJra) 0 ALBERIVILLL VILL PROP DAMAGE-MS-PRIVUE-{,N+IC INTENT T4029 Ate / 4&i 0 ALBERTVILLE VILL Wf-$ZO LESS-wr+m BUILDING-0(H PROP U3286 � 0 ALBEKNILLE VILL MEH-MS-SHOPLIFYIN. 2M LESS L4 — Car 6 subject checks 2 — Citizen aids 5 — Motorists warned 12 - Traffic tickets issued. FERSON/ BUSINESS NAME 262 87000441 1 1548 01/12/87 CITY OF ALbERTVILLE 282 87000704 1 IM4 01/19/87 C11Y OF ALBERTVILLE 262 87000816 1 1536 O1/22/87 HNXENNJELLER CONOCO 7.79m, The biggest tax changes of the last 20 years could occur this year. • Find out how property tax proposals would affect your city. • Hear from key lawmakers. • Get tips on how to lobby the Legislature on city issues. • Talk with your legislators. Don't miss the League of Minnesota Cities Legislative Action Conference. Tuesday, March 10, 1987 1987 Legislative Action Conference Your chance to find out what's at stake for cities Be sure to clear your schedule for The program offers a valuable oppor- you're in St. Paul. City Day on the Tuesday, March 10, so you can attend tunity to hear directly from key law- Hid, a part of the conference program, the 1987 LMC Legislative Action Con- makers. The League urges you to will give you time to discuss the Lea- ference. (See registration and hotel schedule time to meet with your local gue's policies and priorities with law - reservation forms, next page.) legislators at the State Capitol while makers from your district. Program in brief Location: St. Paul Radisson Hotel, Kellogg Boulevard 9:00 a.m. Registration (lower lobby at foot of escalators) 10:00 a.m. Opening General Session "Governor's Property Tax and Fiscal Agenda and its Effects on Cities" Invited Speakers: Tom Triplett, Commissioner of Revenue; Senator Doug Johnson, Chair, Senate Tax Committee; Representative Gordon Voss, Chair, House Taxes Committee; Representative William Schreiber, House Minority Leader Governor Perpich is likely to propose radical changes in the state's property tax system, including possible elimination of all property tax credits and local government aid. Such proposals have major implications for the state -local fis- cal relationship and Minnesota cities. 12 Noon Luncheon "The Legislative Agenda and Its Impact on Cities" Invited Speakers: Senator Roger Moe, Senate Majority Leader; Repre- sentative Fred Norton, Speaker of the House Legislative leaders win give you their perspective on the outcome of major proposals under consideration during the '87 Session and let you know what those changes may mean at the local level. 1:30 p.m. Legislative Issues: General Sessions Environmental Issues: Focus on Wastewater Treatment and Solid Waste Management An overview of environmental issues for cities with a discussion of federal action. Special attention on wastewater treat- ment construction grant financing assist- ance and solid waste management policy decisions, sewer and water rates, requirements for solid waste disposal facilities, and recycling programs. 1:30 p.m. Development Issues (cont.) City authority and control over local economic development will receive seri- ous attention during '87. Issues dealing with industrial development bonds, tax increment financing, taxable municipal bonds, and other development issues will be addressed. Finance Issues The League will brief cities on reac- tions to proposed property tax reform measures, and will review possible changes in the system of Local Govern- ment Aid and property tax credits. 2:30 p.m. How to Lobby Get to know the most effective way to gain the support for legislation your city needs. Find out how to get the attention of local legislators and learn the basic strategies that will help you make convincing arguments to lawmakers. 2:45 p.m. Legislative Briefing LMC/AMM Legislative Staff: Don Slater, LMC Executive Director; Joel Jamnik, Legislative Counsel; Laurie Fiori Hacking, Legislative Representa- tive; Stan Peskar, LMC General Coun- sel; Helen Schendel, LMC Associate Director; Vern Peterson, AMM Exec- utive Director; Roger Peterson, AMM Legislative Director 3:15 p.m. City Day on the Hill Shuttle buses will be available to transport city officials to and from the Capitol. Plan to meet with your legisla- tors and let them know where cities stand on key legislative issues. 5:30 p.m. LMC/AMM Reception for Legislators and State Officials Open to city officials registered for the conference and to state lawmakers and appointed officials. LMC 1987 Legislative Conference —TUESDAY, MARCH 10, 1987 :ADISSON ST. PAUL HOTEL 11 EAST KELLOGG BLVD. 00 City (Please print or type) Name Title Name Title Name Title Registration fee: $50.00 advance, $55.00 on -site Check enclosed in the amount of $ Fee includes conference registration, luncheon, and evening reception with legislators invited. Mail to Gayle L. Brodt, League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101 . q..;.,A r, v �,�.-.... IU RADISSON ST PAUL HOTEL DON'T FORGET — MAKE CHECK OR MONEY ORDER PAYABLE TO RADISSON ST PAUL DO NOT SEND CURRENCY ORGANIZATION LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES FUNCTION 1987 LEGISLATIVE CONFERENCE DATES ALL REOUESTS FOR THE ABOVE GROUP MUST BE RECEIVED By _ FEBRUARY 27, 1987 Please reserve accommodations for NAME COMPANY LAST FIRST ADDRESS CITY __ STATE ZIP CODE _ SHARING ROOM WITH NO OF PERSONS SIGNATURE __.. PHf1NF IUI IAARFR MARCH 10, 1987 Print or Type CHECK IN TIME 3:00 PM �MUNT. DAB I YEAR I I ARRIVAL IIME MONTR DAY YEAR CHECK OUT TIME 1:00 PM ARRIVAL DALE DEPARTURE DATE Accommodations will not be guaranteed without a check for the 1st night's deposit. or your major credit card number as requested below. Should you prefer not to guarantee your reservation. your room will be held only until 6:00 p m of your arrival day. You will be charged for the 1st night if reservations are not cancelled 48 hours prior to arrival. CREDIT CARD a I I AMEX I I DINERS CLUB I VISA 1 MASTERCARD EXPIRATION DATE PLEAS[ CHECK ONE I PLEASE CHECK PREFERRED ACCOMMODATIONS SPECIAL REDUCED RATES FOR L. M. C. ME74BERS: $54. SINGLE $84. DOUBLE OCCUPANCY IF RATE REQUESTED IS NOT AVAILABLE. NEAREST AVAILABLE RATE WILL BE ASSIGNED THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL $ a 00 I CHARGE FOR THE THIRD OR FOURTH OCCUPANT IN EACH ROOM RATES ARE SUBJECT TO APPLICABLE TAXES NO CHARGE FOR CHILDREN UNDER 18 OCCUPYING THE SAME ROOM AS PARENTS 170 1? 1 February 1987 13 OFFICE OF COUNTY ASSESSOR WRIGHT COUNTY COURTHOUSE BUFFALO, MINNESOTA 55313 Telephone: 682-3900 (Ext. 100) Metro: 339-6881 February 24, 1987 TO: Maureen Andrews, Albertville City Administrator Box 131 Albertville, MN 55301 DO UGLAS M. GR UBER, COUNTY ASSESSOR Orland Kreitlow, Appraiser Duane Swenson, Appraiser Randal DesMarais, Appraiser Please be advised that your 1987 Board of Review has been tentatively set for Tuesday, May 5th at 7:00 P.M. at Albertville City Hall If we do not hear from you by March 11, 1987, we will assume this is satisfactory. Thank you. j/ J� Douglas M. Gruber Wright County Assessor CITY OF HANOVER 11250 - 5TH STREET N.E. HANOVER, MINNESOTA 55341 (612)497-3777 February 20, 1987 TO: City of Albertville City of Corcoran City of Greenfield City of Rockford City of Rogers City of St. Michael Township of Frankfort Township of Hassan Township of Rockford FROM: Maxine Ladda, Mayo,�� City of Hanover j RE: MINNESOTA COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Jane Leonard of the Minnesota State Planning Agency will be at the Hanover City Hall on March 12th at 7:30 p.m. to explain the Minnesota Community Improvement Program. This free program offers technical assistance and statewide recognition to communities whose citizens are willing to communicate, coordinate, and cooperate on their way to a better quality of life. It can be the entry point to other programs described below: • Minnesota Main Street - a program that offers assis- tance in downtown revitalization. It stresses four key points to improve a downtown's image and competitive posi- tion -- promotion, organization, design and economic restructuring. • Governor's Design Team - a group of professional architects, landscape architects, students, and others who will work with our communities to give us ideas for improving community areas identified as needing help or change. • Minnesota Beautiful - a statewide, voluntary, beauti- fication and clean-up program. It will help keep our communities, and Minnesota, a clean, beautiful and better place to live, work and visit. Join us to find out how we can harness community pride for years to come. By March llth, please let us know how many from your community will be attending. If you have any questions, please call 497-3777. CtY�.d�ru;c�ho,-� C u 11EYER-ROHLIN, INC. C7 LU O ENGINEERS -LAND SURVEYORS 1111 Hwy. 25 N. Buffalo, Minn.55313 Phone 612-682-1781 1 �::7 March 2, 1987 Honorable Mayor & City Council c/o Maureen Andrews, Administrator Albertville, MN 55301 Re: Reasibility Study - Street Maintenance Dear Members of the Council: Description - As requested, we have conducted a feasibility study for Street Maintenance within the City of Albertville, as indicated on the attached sketch. Streets proposed for overlay Lander Avenue Northeast from 56th Street Northeast to 58th Street Northeast - 56th Street Northwest from Lander Avenue Northeast East to Main Avenue, and from Main Avenue to Large Avenue Northeast. - Large Avenue Northeast from 56th Street Northeast to 57th Street Northeast Street proposed for Seal Coat High Priority Streets - 60th Street Northeast from approximately 135' West of the intersection of 60th Street Northeast and Lamont Avenue Northeast to the westerly end of 60th Street Northeast. - Large Avenue Northeast from County Highway Number 37 South to Barthels Industrial Drive. - Barthels Industrial Drive from Large Avenue Northeast to the Burlington Northern Railway Thore P. Meyer, Professional Engineer Robert Rohlin, Licensed Land Surveyor - 56th Street Northeast from approximately 165' West of Lander Avenue Northeast westerly to Lander Avenue Northeast - 55th Street Northeast from Main Avenue, West to the end of 55th Street Northeast - Lander Avenue Northeast from 56th Street Northeast South to approximately 180' South of 55th Street Northeast Low Priority Streets - 54th Street Northeast from Main Avenue East to Large Avenue Northeast and from Large Avenue Northeast to Barthels Industrial Drive - 54th Circle - Large Avenue Northeast from 54th Street Northeast North to approximately 160' South of 55th Street Northeast - 51st Street from Main Avenue East to approximately 170' West of 53rd Street Northeast Existing Street Conditions The existing streets proposed for a bituminous overlay have developed extensive cracking and some differential settling. The existing streets proposed for seal coating all have fairly good structural stability but are starting to deteriorate on the surface. The amount of deterioration is indicated by a high priority rating or low priority rating. Proposed Street Maintanence Streets proposed for overlay would need to be analyzed to determine which of two options would be desired by the city prior to overlayment. The first option would be to remove all badly cracked areas and rebuild the sub -base if needed, followed by patching. The second alternative would be to skin patch all low areas in the street followed by laying a paving membrane to a properly tacked surface. After completing one of the above alternatives, a 12" bituminous mat can be laid to improve the structural stability, ridability and life of the street. Streets proposed for seal coating would receive a light coating of bituminous oil followed by pea rock on all streets except Barthels Industrial Drive which would receive granite chips. Estimated Costs Streets proposed for overlay - Lander Avenue Northeast Paving Membrane & Overlay Patching & Overlay - 56th Street Northeast Paving Membrane & Overlay Patching & Overlay - Large Avenue Northeast Paving Membrane & Overlay Overlay Streets proposed for Seal Coat High Priority Streets - 60th Street Northeast - 58th Street Northeast - 57th Street Northeast - 55th Street Northeast - Lander Avenue Northeast - Barthel Industrial Drive TOTAL Low Priority Streets - 54th Street Northeast - 51st Street Northeast - 54th Circle Northeast - Large Avenue Northeast $16, 230 $18,400 $11,470 $ 9,135 $ 7,470 $ 4,520 $ 2,120 $ 800 $ 3,700 $ 1,300 $ 1,420 $ 5,400 $14,740 $ 4,180 $ 2,850 $ 1,200 $ 900 TOTAL $ 9,130 Conclusion Streets Proposed for Overlayment - Lander Avenue Northeast and 56th Street Northeast would require one of the options as outlined under "Proposed Street Maintenance" followed by a 12" Bituminous Overlay. Large Avenue Northeast however, would require only a 12" Bituminous Overlay because of its better structural stability. An overlay on Large Avenue would improve the ridability and life of the roadway. Streets Proposed for Seal Coat - As stated under "Proposed Street Maintenance" and from our street inspection, several streets were listed as high priority streets. These streets are in need of a crack sealing and seal coating application. Failure to execute a maintenance program on these streets could result in a more extensive reconstruction project in the near future. Low priority streets are currently in the condition that normally they would require a seal coat application but as a compared to the high priority streets they are of secondary significance. It should be noted that if the City has serious convictions to use a paving membrane prior to overlayment, an intensive survey of area projects that have used such a fabric should be undertaken to confirm performance. SincereYy yours, HLIN, re Meyer, BDJ:1 cc:E-9701-A City of Albertville c/o Maureen Andrews, Admin./Clerk Yi ♦ALa moo L A 199 .. . . .... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . BITUMINOUS O�ERLAY HIGH PRIORITY (SEAL COAT CITY OF ALSERTViLLE II I WRIGHT COUNTY, MINNESOTA SPRINGSTED INCORPORATED Public Finance Advisors 85 East Seventh Place, Suite 100 Saint Paul, Minnesota 55101-2143 612-223-3000 February 18, 1987 Ms. Maureen Andrews, Administrator City Hall Albertville, Minnesota 55301 RE: Street Improvement Projects Dear Ms. Andrews: The following are sorne general comrnents regarding street improvements and the methods of financing those costs. Perhaps the least controversial method of financing the resurfacing of streets is to pay for such costs out of the general fund. The amount required would be included in the annual budget and it would be up to the Council and staff to allocate the receipt of taxes for that purpose. There is one major benefit with this procedure and that is if the costs are less than the funds allocated, the remaining money can be used for any purpose or be kept for a fund balance reserve. On the downside, the levy would be within any levy limits for the City. The method used by most communities in the State is to issue bonds pursuant to Chapter 429, Minnesota Statutes. For new streets this generally does not cause a problem. However, when it comes to reconstructing a street or resurfacing a street which is only five years old, it is difficult to determine and establish benefit. Pursuant to Chapter 429, a minimum of 20% of project costs must be assessed against benefited property. The City could issue bonds pursuant to Chapter 475, Minnesota Statutes. This would require a referendum for which you would need a simple majority of votes cast to receive authorization. If the project is going to be City-wide, this would not necessarily pose a problem. However, if the project only covers a portion of the City, you will probably encounter significant opposition from the taxpayers who would not be getting the benefit of the project. As an alternative to the aforementioned, the 1986 session of the Legislature enacted a new provision to the statutes which is found in Section 471.572, Minnesota Statutes. I have enclosed a copy for your reference. In essence, this provision enables the City to establish an Infrastructure Replacement Reserve Fund. This fund may be used only for the replacement of streets, bridges, curbs, gutters and storm sewers. To receive authorization to establish this fund, the City must publish a resolution authorizing a tax levy. If a petition for an election is not received within 10 days after the publication, the City has the authority to levy taxes for the fund. This levy is considered a special levy. Please let us know if you need any further information on this subject Sincerely, Gerard B. annon Vice President /mgh Enclosure 10 Sec. 14. [471.5721 (INFRASTRUCTURE REPLACEMENT RESERVE 11 FUND.] 12 Subdivision I. (DEFINITIONS.] For purposes of this 13 section, the'followina terms have the meanings given: 14 "Reserve fund" means the infrastructure re lacement reserve 15 fund. 16 *City" means a statutory or home rule charter cites 17 Subd. 2. (TAX LEVY.] The governing body of a city -maw 18 establish, by a two-thirds vote of all its members, by ordinance 19 or resolution a reserve fund and may annually levy a property 20 tax for the support of the fund. The proceeds of taxes levied 21 for its support must be vaid into the reserve fund. Any other 22 revenue from a source not requited by law to be paid into 23 another fund for ur ses other than those provided for the use 24 of the reserve fund may be paid into the fund. A_tax levied by 25 the city in accordance with this section is a special levy 26 within the meaning of section 275.50, subdivision S. Before a 27 tax is levied under this section, the city must publish in the 28 official newspaper of the city an initial resolution authorizing 29 the tax levy. If within ten days after the publication a 30 petition is filed with the city clerk re uestin an election on 31 the tax levy signed bv a number of qualified voters greater than 32 ten percent of the number who voted in the city at the last 33 general election, the tax may not be levied until the levy has 34 been approved by a majority of the votes cast on it at a reqular 35 or special election. 36 Subd. 3. (PURPOSES-1 The reserve fund may be used only for 65 3/17/86 (REVISOR ) JCR/JA CCREF2287 1 the replacement of streets, bridges, curbs, gutters and storm 2 sewers. 3 Subd. 4. (USE OF FUND FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE.) If the city 4 has established a reserve fund, it may submit to the voters at a 5 regular or special election the question of whether use of the 6 fund should be restricted to a specific improvement or type of 7 capital improvement. If a majority of the votes cast on the 8 question are in favor of the limitation on the use of the 9 reserve fund, it may be used only for the purpose approved by 10 the voters. 11 Subd. S. [HEARING; NOTICE.] A reserve fund may not be 12 established until after a public hearing is held on the 13 question. Notice of the time, place, and purpose of the hearing 14 must be published for two successive weeks in the official 15 newspaper of the city. The second publication must be not later 16 than seven days before the date of the hearing 17 Subd. 6. (TERMINATION OF FUND.r The city may terminate a 18 reserve fund at any time in the same manner as the fund was 19 established. Upon termination of the fund any balance is 20 irrevocably appropriated to the debt service fund'of the city to 21 be used solely to reduce tax levies for or bonded indebtedness 22 of the city or, if the city has no bonded indebtedness, for 23 capital improvements authorized by this section v N m Ln W Z 0 W n M 8 Cj: H a In 0 tn W C O~ f � } Q 0 Z O a FIRST CLASS U.S. POSTAGE PAID St. Paul, MN PERMIT NO. 3223 Maureen Andrews Admr.—Clerk—Treas. City Hall ALBERTVILLE, MN 55301 League of Minnesota Cities CITIES BULLETIN An update of legislative and congressional actions affecting cities Feb. 14-20, Number 7 1987 Including reviews of metropolitan area issues by the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101, (612) 227-5600 Highlights LMC Cities Bulletin, No. 7 Feb. 1 -20, 1987 Research shows effects of governor's tax proposal on cities.............................................W-1 The Minnesota House research staff has estimated the impact of the governor's proposed changes on cities on a regional basis. (See overview page W-1. Tables Tables begin after the Federal Update section.) Wastewater treatment...........................................W-2 Summaries of bills Note: The League summaries bills of interest to city officials. Courts....................................................S-1 Economic development......................................S-1 Environment...............................................S-1 General government........................................S-1 Liquor....................................................S-2 Metropolitan..............................................S-2 Personnel.................................................S-2 Pensions and retirement...................................S-3 Special legislation.......................................S-4 Transportation............................................S-4 Utilities.................................................S-4 General revenue sharing ...................... .................. F-1 W=Week in review S=Summaries of bills F=Federal update W-1 Week in review RESEARCH SHOWS EFFECTS OF GOVERNOR'S PROPERTY TAX PROPOSAL ON CITIES The governor's tax proposal calls for a major restructuring of our property tax system, including a reduction in the number of classifications from 68 to 5 and the consolidation of local government aid and all property tax credits into an Education Credit available to nearly all properties (except tax increment districts, vacant land in cities, and mineral and utility property). The House of Representatives research staff has estimated the impact of these proposed changes on cities grouped on a regional basis. (See tables after the Federal Update section of this week's Cities Bulletin.) On a statewide basis, had the governor's proposal been in effect in payable 1987, city levies would have been 51.3 percent higher. The higher levies would have been necessary to make up for the loss of nearly $309 million in local government aid (LGA), as proposed under Governor Perpich's plan. Under the proposal, net property tax burdens (after granting the Education Credit) for some classes of property would increase: * residential homestead net tax burdens would rise over $45 million (or 6.3 percent), * agricultural non -homesteads would increase 14.8 percent, * seasonal recreational residential would go up 25.1 percent, * vacant land would rise 14.6 percent, * subsidized apartments would rise 41.5 percent. Other classes of property would experience decreases in their net property tax burdens: * agricultural homesteads would decline 78.6 percent, * apartments would decrease 9.8 percent, * commercial burdens would decrease $43 million (or 7 percent), * industrial property taxes would decline $31 million (or 13.2 percent). The tables combine the effects on cities within certain geographic regions and thus will average the effects of the proposal on cities within the region. Estimates of the effect on individual cities could vary significantly from these regional averages. The print-outs also tend to underestimate the full effect of the governor's proposal on local property taxes. This under -estimate occurs because the print-outs do not take into account the levy increases that are likely to occur. Because the governor's proposal freezes the amount of property tax relief available to local governments, if property tax levies rise then local taxpayers would pay the full amount of that increase. W-2 NOW YOU SEE IT. NOW YOU DON'T --WASTEWATER TREATMENT On Tuesday the Senate Environment Subcommittee considered S.F. 1 (Moe) which, among other things, would establish a Minnesota public facilities authority. The authority would have transferred to it from the Pollution Control Agency the responsibility for administering the Independent State Wastewater Treatment Construction Grant Program, as well as any new federal/state loan program. Additionally, the bill contemplates that the facility authority would be able to allocate grants based on economic development considerations. This is in contrast to the current PCA regulations which focus almost entirely on the environmental impact of effluent discharges. On Wednesday afternoon, the subcommittee removed from S.F. 1 those sections of the bill that would have created the new authority. In short, the subcommittee decided that it would be best for PCA to continue administration of the program. The bill now goes to the full Senate Environment Committee where it is possible that the proponents of the bill will seek to re-insert the sections that the subcommittee removed. While the League has not adopted a formal policy or LMC Board resolution on this matter as of this time, the League's environmental policy supports retention of the administration of the grants program with the Pollution Control Agency, and that economic development considerations not become a significant factor in determining the allocation of grant funds. NEW WASTEWATER GRANTS PROPOSAL On Wednesday evening the Legislative Commission on Waste Management met and considered a proposal by the Pollution Control Agency to re -direct the Wastewater Treatment Construction Grant Program to those communities who have not yet received financial assistance. This change in focus would result in a program aimed at approximately 200 cities and would cost the state approximately $500 million over the next 10 years. A more detailed analysis of this proposal will be included in next week's Cities Bulletin. Preliminary indications are that the proposal conforms to the League's wastewater treatment financing policy and the League will support the proposal. S-1 Summaries of bills COURTS Volunteer fire chief --immunity. S.F. 404 (Bertram) (Judiciary) would give a fire chief of a non-profit firefighting corporation or association immunity for damages arising out of the performance of firefighting or related activities of the corporation or association and its members. DWI violations --license revocation. S.F. 390 (Spear) (Judiciary) would include a violation of a local DWI ordinance in the determination to revoke a person's driver's license. The bill would require the juvenile court to report juvenile traffic violations to the department of public safety. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Rural development program. S.F. 426 (Stumpf, Langseth, Davis, DeCramer) (Agricultural would establish a rural development program to promote the development and retention of economically sound industries and commerce in rural areas throughout the state. *Economic development —authorities. S.F. 422 (Diessner, Frank, Solon, D.J. Johnson, Bran517�_Economic Development & Housing) would authorize economic development authorities (EDA) to construct and furnish buildings on land owned by the EDA and would provide for a reverse referendum on the issuance of general obligation bonds by an EDA. ENVIRONMENT Cholydane pesticides. S.F. 345 (Jude, Marty, Ramstad, Dahl, Wegscheid) (Environment & Natural Resources) would prohibit the use of any pesticide containing chlordane or its derivation heptachlor. GENERAL GOVERNMENT *Management of state mandates. S.F. 433 (Wegscheid, Adkins, Benson, Diessner, Schmitz) (Local & Urban) would provide criteria and guidelines to regulate the development, imposition, and management of state mandates upon local governmental units and would require either the local governmental unit to accept the mandate by action of its governing body or the Legislature to appropriate funds before a state mandate could be effective. V_e_nding machine_ins ection fees. S.F. 407 (Wegscheid, Adkins, Schmitz, Taylor, Jude) ((Agriculture) would limit the amount a governmental entity could charge for a vending machine inspection or license fee to no more than the state's inspection fee. S-2 Qualified newspapers --le al notices. S.F. 403 (Bertram, Mcquaid, Renneke, Wegscheid, Schmitz) (Local & Urban) would allow only qualified newspapers to accept and publish a public notice. LIQUOR Dram shop insurance_Qremiums. S.F. 442 (Bertram) (Commerce) would require dram shop insurance premiums to be based on the claims experience of the named insured. METROPOLITAN Modifying cost allocating systems of the Metropolitan Waste Control Commission. S.F. 348 (Novak, Luther, Laidig, Frank, Wegscheid (Local and Urban) would establish a single uniform rate structure for wastewater treatment for all cities which are part of the regional treatment system. The bill would allow the commission to establish a reserve or contingency fund not to exceed 7.5 percent of the commission's total operating budget. The proposal would change the treatment of current value credits and authorize the commission a transition period of four years to phase in the new cost allocation system. The bill would eliminate the individual sewer service areas and the service area advisory boards but would enable the commission to establish advisory committees to assist in the performance of its duties. Editors note: The bill is consistent with the report of the Rate Structure Task Force and is consistent with policy of the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities. PERSONNEL Restriction of off -the -job activities. H.F. 434 (Sarna, Ogren, O'Connor, Osthoff, Bishop) (Labor -Management Relations) would prohibit an employer from discriminating or penalizing an employee because of the employee's participation in legal off -the -job activities, unless the activities interfere with the employee's on-the-job performance. Workers' compensation --permanent total disability compensation. S.F. 366 (MerriamT-Employment would define the compensation for a permanent total disability to be the greater of 1) 66-2/3 percent of the daily wage at the time of the injury, or 2) 66-2/3 percent of the daily wage at the time a permanent total disability determination is made, subject to the maximum weekly compensation. Unfair_ discriminatory practices. S.F. 352 (Spear, Berglin, Cohen, Piper, Brandl) ZJudiciaryT would prohibit employers from discriminating against a person based upon the person's affectional or sexual orientation. S-3 Definition of professional strikebreaker. S.F. 340 (D.J. Johnson) Employment would expand the definition of a professional strikebreaker to include an employee who is transfered to a place of business where a labor dispute is in progress to replace an employee involved in the dispute. Unemployment compensation reform. S.F. 430 (Gustafson, Taylor, Mcquaid, Knaal, Bernhag(Employment) would redefine the unemployment compensation benefit and tax system to a wage detail system. Unemployment compesation reform. S.F. 410 (Brataas, Knutson, Ramstad, Benson, D.R. Frederickson) (Employment) would redefine the administration of the unemployment compensation system. PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT *Defined contribution volunteer ambulance and rescue worker retirement fund. S.F. 1 D.E. Johnson, D.R. Frederickson, Renneke, Samualson, DeCramer) (Governmental Operations) would authorize the creation of an optional volunteer ambulance or rescue workers defined contribution retirement fund. Each member's account would be credited with a pro-rata share of interest earned on the fund and distributions would be available to those who put in at least five years of service, have ceased to be an active volunteer, and who have reached at least age 55 or become disabled. The bill also would allow an alternative simplified pension plan under section 401 of the Internal Revenue Code. Pension membership --contractual right. H.F. 458 (Simoneau, Knickerbocker, Clark, R. Johnson, Reding) (Governmental Operations) would make membership in a public pension plan an enforceable contract right. PERA--vesting standards. H.F. 463 (Simoneau, Knickerbocker, Clark, Larsen, RedinGovernmental Operations) would lower the vesting standards in PERA from ten years to five and from five years to three for disabled people. Employee and employer contributions. S.F. 431 (D. Moe, Wegscheid, Pogemiller, Renneke Governmental Operations) would increase employee contributions to the Minnesota state retirement system from 3.75 percent to 4.0 percent and employer contributions from 3.90 percent to 4.25 percent. The retirement annuity formula would be changed to multiplying the employee's average salary by 1.5 percent for each year of allowable service instead of the current 1.0 percent for the first ten years of service and 1.5 percent for the rest. The eligibility requirements for surviving spouses would also change. PERA—administration. H.F. 45'1 (R. Johnson, Simoneau, Knickerbocker Governmental Operations) would classify certain data on individuals held by PERA as private data, and would S-4 require: 1) procedures to assure procedural due process to benefit applicants and recipients on the denial of benefits; 2) employer contributions within 20 calendar days; and 3) payroll abstracts in March and October. Under the bill, PERA board members, officers, and employees could purchase fiduciary liability insurance and bonds and the board could contract for professional services. SPECIAL LEGISLATION Ramsey county charter commission. H.F. 465 (Kostohryz, Osthoff, Wynia, Orenstein, Rose) (Local & Urban) would authorize the Ramsey County legislative delegation to nominate 41 people to sit on a charter commission, which would consist of 17 people authorized to frame a charter to provide for the form of government for Ramsey County. Metropolitan transit commission --peace officers. S.F. 420 (D. Peterson, Lantry, McQuaid, Marty Governmental Operations) would authorize the MTC to employ peace officers to police its property and routes. TRANSPORTATION Railroad crossings. H.F. 404 (Wenzel, McEachern) (Transportation) would require railroad companies that maintain graded railroad crossings to place stop signs at each crossing. Licensing of limousine services. S.F. 343 (Jude, Purfeerst, McQuaid, Metzen, Mehrkens Transportation) would authorize the registrar of motor vehicles to license and regulate limousine services. This proposed law would pre-empt any local ordinances regulating limousine services. UTILITIES Strict liability for utilities. S.F. 378 (Merriam) (Public Utilities & Energy) would make a public utility, cooperative electric association, or municipal power agency strictly liable for damages caused by direct or indirect contact by an individual with an electric power line owned by the utility and would create a duty to trim vegetation around power lines. *League -supported. F-1 Federal update GENERAL REVENUE SHARING --DISTRIBUTION, DESIGNATION FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES, DEADLINES FOR DESIGNATION DISTRIBUTION OF GENERAL All cities received notice recently from the U.S. Treasury on the distribution of $74 million in State Contingency Reserves. In Minnesota, the amount of additional GRS funds to be allocated will total $1.393 million, and is scheduled for Friday, February 20. Along with that notice has come further information on the deadline for formal city action to designate GRS monies for local purposes. The department will not make payments smaller than $200. Such amounts will be distributed proportionately among all governmental units qualifying for payments larger than $200. No information will be available on the amounts individual cities will receive until after February 23. The department will make reserve payments in the same manner as the September 30, 1986 GRS payment your city received last fall as the last entitlement payment prior to the elimination of the GRS program. Those cities that received the September 30 payment through Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) may need to alert their banks of this additional payment to be sure that their EFT account remains open. The U.S. Treasury also set a requirement for formal action that each GRS recipient (i.e., cities, counties, and townships) must take to designate all GRS funds, including interest earnings, for a particular purpose or use. Deadline for such official cit council action is Sept 30, 1987 The council can accomplish this through resolution or ordinance. Distribution of GRS challenged While the U.S. Treasury has announced the GRS distribution (as part of the wind -down of the program), the department has also transferred an additional $180 million in sequestered 1986 GRS funds from the GRS Trust Fund to the general fund of the federal budget for other federal government uses. The National League of Cities has joined other local government associations in a lawsuit challenging the legality of this action. The GRS funds went into the federal budget general fund represent the 4.3 percent Gramm-Rudman reductions taken from local government in 1986. NLC maintains that those GRS funds must, by law, be held in the GRS Trust Fund. Those revenues are to revert to the U.S. Treasury only after all entitlement payments are complete. NLC is requesting that those funds must now be released to cities. For Minnesota, that would be an additional $2.38 million. Analysis of the Governor's property tax reform proposal by the House Research Department SIMULATION 87J 211 M Simulation of: Governor's Tax Proposal (as if it were in effect for payable 1987) VS. Estimated Payable 1987 - Current Law Included in Governor's Proposal: - Proposed new classification ratios - Education credit consisting of 98.5% of 1987 local government aids Plus estimates of these 1987 credit amounts: homestead credit, agricultural credit, wetlands credit and native prairie credit - Full amount of 1987 LGA added to county, city and town levies - Assumes no exercise of local option to shift education credit - Tax increment assessed values increased by 75% to adjust for changes in _ classification ratios (tax increment assessed values assumed to include 85% commercial, 7.5% apartments, 7.5% industrial) - Fiscal disparities contribution values increased by 78.6% (75/42) to adjust for changes in classification ratios; FD area -wide mill rate reduced by same percentage - Taconite credit assumed to apply after education credit Major effects not included: - No impact of new classification ratios on EARC, which would affect district -by -district school levies (but not state total) - System modeled is 1987 rather than 1988, which would be the rust affected year. In 1988, the credit amounts would be the same but levies would be generally somewhat higher, making all property classes slightly worse off - No reflection of changes in levies resulting from other aspects of governor's budget proposal (e.g. sales tax on local government, welfare changes, school aids changes, etc.) Payable 1987 Property Tax Projections Statewide and regional NORTHWEST Becker Clay Douglas Grant Kittson Marshall Norman Otter Tail Pennington Polk Pope Red Lake Roseau Stevens Traverse Wilkin SOUTHWEST Big Stone Chippewa Cottonwood Jackson Kandiyohi Lac Qui Parle Lincoln Lyon McLeod Meeker Murray Nobles Pipestone Redwood Renville Rock Swift Yellow Medicine FIGURE 7 PROPERTY TAX MODEL REPORT REGIONS NORTH CENTRAL Be) tram I Cass Clearwater Crow Wing• Hubbard Lake of the Woods Mahnomen Morrison Todd Wadens CENTRAL NORTHEAST Aftkin• Carlton Cook• Itasca• Koochichfng• Lake' St. Louis• Benton Pine Chisago Sherburne Isanti Stearns Kanabec Wright Mille Lacs METRO Anoka Carver Dakota Hennepin Ramsey Scott Washington SOUTHEAST Blue Earth Houston Sibley Brown LeSueur Steele Dodge Martin Wabasha Faribault Mower Waseca Fillmore Nicollet Watonwan Freeborn Olmsted Winona Goodhue Rice •The county contains cities and towns which receive taconite home- stead credit. The data on page 11 lists the net tax effects of all of these "taconite" cities and towns." When determining the net tax amounts for the NORTH CENTRAL and the NORTH- EAST regions, these cities and towns which receive taconite credit have been excluded. STATEWIDE ' PROPERTY TAX S I N U L A T 1 ON BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROPERTY CLASS .............. AG HS AG NOW-HS TIMBERLANDS SEAS•REC•RES'AL RESIDENTIAL NS RES NON -MS APARTMENTS SUBSIDIZED APTS COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL UTILITY i PERS .ENTERPRISE ZONE VACANT LAND RAILROAD MINERAL -DISABLED HMSTO TOTAL MARKET VALUE f iiiiliiiiiliiiiiiiiiiitiii.Till■ii iiiiiiiifffaii BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ........---- AMOUNT PCT. 0 000'S) (100013) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ..... 17777614. 14.6 17T77614. 14.6 0 0 7316050. 6.0 7316050. 6.0 0 0 267700. .2 267700. .2 0 0 3205206. 2.6 3205206. 2.6 0 0 56512857. 46.4 56512857. 46.4 0 0 6308473. 5.2 6308473. 5.2 0 - 0 4828275. 4.0 4828275. 4.0 0 0 1114723. .9 1114728. .9 0 0 13476690. 11.1 13476690. 11.1 0 0 4925663. 4.0 4925663. 4.0 0 0 "03172. 3.6 "03172. 3.6 0 0 101043. .1 101043. .1 0 0 1168822. 1.0 1168922. 1.0 0 0 246407. .2 246407. .2 0 0 33218. .0 33218. .0 0 0 137596. ...... .1 ..... 137596. ...... .1 0 0 121823515. 100.0 ..... 121823515. 100.0 ...... ----- 0 0 ASSESSED VALUE ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 871 BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE •........... CHANGE AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... ............ AMOUNT PCT. 0 000'S) (1000'S) ...... (1000'S) ..... 2930085. 9.9 36437". 7.4 713692. 24.4 1316889. 4.5 3016995. 6.2 1700106. 129.1 48186. .2 107080. .2 58894. 122.2 673093. 2.3 1923124. 3.9 1250031. 135.7 11029696. 37.4 14732096. 30.1 3702400. 33.6 1766372. 6.0 3785094. 7.7 2018712. 114.3 1620644. 5.5 2896965. 5.9 1276321. 78.8 224336. .8 668837. 1.4 444501. 198.1 5444705. 18.5 10041412. 20.5 4596707. 84.4 2075795. 7.0 3694247. 7.5 1619452. 78.0 1698%1. 5.3 32993" . 6.7 1600403. 94.2 36838. .1 75782. .2 389" . 105.7 467529. 1.6 832154. 1.7 364625. 75.0 105955. .4 184805. .4 78850. 74.4 16609. .1 24914. .1 8305. 50.0 6880. .0 27519. .1 20639. 300.0 29462554. 100.0 48954135. 100.0 19491581. 66.2 LEVIES (10001S) fiilp.iiililiiilailfiiiii a.a■iiilii■fitiliiiifaiiiiiili ifi■iiallfii ill! TAX COUNTY .......... CITY/TOWN .......... SCHOOL SPECIAL .......... TOTAL INCREMENT BASELINE: 862706. 601768. .......... 1428993. 95826. .......... 2989293. ......... 112542. ALTER14ATIVE: 573149. .......... 910290. .......... 1428993. 95826. .......... 3313258. 139620. CHANGE: 15443. 308522. .......... 0 0 .......... 323965. ......... 26775. PCT. CHANGE: 1.8 51.3 0 0 10.8 23.7 ASSESSED VALUES (1000'S) itiiafii.iiiiiiii is..... FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX...................... INCREMENT CONTRIBUTN DISTRIBUTN .......... 956516. 1511339. 1511339. 1673904. 2698819. 1511339. .......... .......... .......... 717388. 1187480. 0 75.0 78.6 0 STATEWIDE ' PROPERTY TAX 3 l M U L A T I OM BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 19a7: CURRENT LAW VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GROSS TAX BURDEN ■■sa■a■aa■.■aa..s..■■■..■■s■■s■■■■■■a■ass■■■s■■■ BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE PROPERTY CLASS AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. .............. 0 000'S) ...... (100013) ..... ...... (100013) ..... AG HS 277331. 8.5 Z22249. 6.1 -55132. -19.9 AG MOM-NS 120822. 3.7 176a53. 4.9 56031. 46.4 TIMBERLANDS 5620. .2 7204. .2 1584. 2a.2 SEAS-REC-RES'AL 680". 2.1 107695. 3.0 39631. 58.2 RESIDENTIAL NS 1268916. 38.9 1143370. 31.6 -1Z5546. -9.9 RES MON-NS 204835. 6.3 304528. 8.4 99693. 48.7 APARTMENT$ 187314. 5.7 233921. 6.5 46407. 24.7 SUBSIDIZED APT$ 27275. .8 59560. 1.6 322115. 113.4 COMMERCIAL 617790. 18.9 772067. 21.4 154277. 25.0 INDUSTRIAL 236155. 7.2 MINI. 7.a 45426. 19.2 UTILITY i PERS 177510. 5.4 217M . 6.0 40260. 22.7 ENTERPRISE ZONE 4996. .2 8070. .2 3074. 61.5 VACANT LAND 5204a. 1.6 60886. 1.7 8838. 17.0 RAILROAD 12435. .4 14a27. .4 2392. 19.2 MINERAL 2573. .1 2664. .1 91. 3.5 DISABLED NMSTO 929. .0 2353. .1 1524. 183.3 TO 3264762. 100.0 3615598. 100.0 350836. 10.7 ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: a7J MET TAX BURDEN EFFECTIVE TAX RATE ■a■a■■s■sssaa■ss:■■■■ssssassssssaa:assas:s:■■rasa ssassssss BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ BASE ALT. AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT PCT. .... .... PCT. PCT. (100013) 0 000'S) ...... 0 000'S) ..... .... .... 135997. 5.4 125725. 4.9 -10272. -7.6 .76 .71 91176. 3.6 104635. 4.1 13459. 14.8 1.25 1.43 4275. .2 4623. .2 343. 8.1 1.60 1.73 58975. 2.3 73754. 2.9 14779. 25.1 1.84 2.30 725663. 23.6 771119. 30.0 45456. 6.3 1.23 1.36 2041135. 8.1 207964. 8.1 3149. 1.5 3.25 3.30 187514. 7.4 169155. 6.6 -la359. -9.8 3.86 3.50 27275. 1.1 3a589. 1.5 11314. 41.5 2.45 3.46 617272. 24.3 574213. 22.4 -43059. -7.0 4.58 4.26 236135. 9.3 204%1. 8.0 -31174. -13.2 4.79 4.16 177406. 7.0 217120. 8.5 39714. 22.4 4.03 4.93 4239. .2 3913. .2 -326. -7.7 4.20 3.87 52042. 2.1 59634. 2.3 7592. 14.6 4.45 5.10 12435. .5 9174. .4 -3261. -26.2 5.05 3.72 2573. .1 2664. .1 91. 3.5 7.75 8.02 397. ----'- ..... .6 1432. ------ ..... .1 1035. 260.7 .29 1.04 2538211. 100.0 2568697. 100.0 ...... 30486. ..... 1.2 .... .... 2.08 2.11 TAX CREDITS 0 000'S) s■oas■assas■assass■■msassssso■■■s■s■ssus■ssasa■■■assasssas■s■ssssssaasssotasssssas■asas■s HOMESTEAD TACONITE HOMESTEAD' ............................ ................ AG ........ NON -AG ........ TOTAL ........ AG NON -AG TOTAL ........ AG CREDT MISC. AG BUSINESS TOTAL BASELINE: 63103. 533114. 596217. ........ ........ 432. 10550. 10981. ........ 11692a. ........ 1343. ........ 1078. ........ 726552. ALTERNATIVE: ............ 0 ........ 0 ........ 0 ........ 604. 11621. 12224. ........ 0 1033600. 1078. 1046902. CHANGE: -63103. -533114. -596217. ........ ........ 172. 1071. 1243. ........ -116928. ........ 1032252. ........ 0 ........ 320350. PCT. CHANGE: -100.0 -100.0 -100.0 39.8 10.2 11.3 -100.0 76576.6 0 44.1 TOTAL MILL RATE a■■aaa■su sass BASELINE: 110.7 ALTERNATIVE: 74.3 REGION: 1 ' PROPER T T TAX S 1 M U L A T I ON MORTHWEST CITIES (RDC 1") ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1967: CURRENT LAW VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROPERTY CLASS .............. AG HS AG NOM-HS T IMBALANDS SEAS-REC-RES'AL RESIDENTIAL HS RES MON-NS APARTMENTS SUBSIDIZED APTS COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL UTILITY i PERS ENTERPRISE ZONE VACANT LAND RAILROAD MINERAL DISABLED HMSTD TOTAL MARKET VALUE aaaaYW W WaYYaW.Yawaiaaaf aaaa wawi BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... ------ 0 000'S) ----- ...... 0 000'S) (100013) 23304. 1.0 23304. 1.0 0 0 15039. .7 15039.. .7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13056. .6 13056. .6 0 0 1333320. 59.2 1333320. 59.2 0 0 162157. 7.2 162157. 7.2 0 0 99222. 4.4 99222. 4.4 0 0 57519. 2.6 57519. 2.6 0 0 291637. 12.9 291637. 12.9 0 0 46588. 2.1 46588. 2.1 0 0 98823. 4.4 98823. 4.4 0 0 88548. 3.9 8". 3.9 0 0 5753. .3 5753. .3 0 0 13071. .6 13071. .6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4788. .2 4788. .2 0 0 ..... ...... ..... 2252826. 100.0 ...... 2252826. ..... 100.0 ...... 0 0 ASSESSED VALUE ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' oIMULATION: 871 YaaawwaaaYYasasasaaa.Ysua aaaaaaaaasausa BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. ...... ...... (100013) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ..... ..... (100015) 3636. .7 4808. .5 1172. 32.2 2707. .5 6137. .7 3430. 126.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 2742. .5 7834. .9 5092. 185.7 242280. 44.5 275794. 30.9 33514. 13.8 45404. 8.3 97294. 10.9 518". 114.3 33735. 6.2 59533. 6.7 25798. 76.5 9876. 1.8 34511. 3.9 24635. 249.4 104306. 19.2 217927. 24.4 113621. 108.9 19271. 3.5 34941. 3.9 15670. 81.3 39524. 7.3 73713. 8.2 34189. 86.5 32632. 6.0 66411. 7.4 33779. 103.5 2301. .4 4315. .5 2014. 87.5 5621. 1.0 9804. 1.1 4183. 74.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 239. .0 958. .1. 719. 300.8 544274. 100.0 $93979. 100.0 349705. 64.3 LEVIES 0 000'S) zs:..=is...iw..Wsa.Waaaasaass.i:•...Wawaa.:.Y.wW:ss....i. TAX COUNTY CITY/TOWN SCHOOL SPECIAL TOTAL INCREMENT BASELINE: .......... 16730. .......... 204" . .......... 29172. .......... 970. .......... 67317. .......-- 1520. ALTERNATIVE: 17080. 37917. 28973. 945. 84914. .......... 2105. CHANGE: .......... 350. .......... 17473. .......... -199. .......... -25. 17397. ...------ 585. PCT. CHANGE: 2.1 85.5 -.7 -2.6 26.1 38.5 ASSESSED VALUES 0 000'S) FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX...................... INCREMENT CONTRIBUTM DISTRIBUTN .......... .......... .......... 11650. 0 0 20388. 0 0 .......... .......... .......... $738. 0 0 75.0 0 0 REGION: 1 ' PROPERTY TAX S 1 MULAT I ON MORTHIJEST CITIES (RDC 1") ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GROSS TAX BURDEN afi fiat fffifftt�fifttfssti ilf!!i BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ AMOUNT ...... PCT. ----- AMOUNT ...... PCT. AMOUNT PCT. 0 000'S) 0 000'S) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ..... 419. .6 422. .5 3. .7 336. .5 595. .7 259. 77.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 M. .4 534. .6 242. 92.9 30962. 45.0 27499. 31.6 -3463. -11.I 5763. 8.4 9555. 11.0 3792. 65.8 4229. 6.1 5692. 6.5 1463. 34.6 1266. 1.8 3465. 4.0 2199. 173.7 13013. 18.9 20793. Z3.9 7780. 59.3 2267. 3.3 2974. 3.4 707. 31.2 5010. 7.3 7227. 8.3 2217. 44.3 4242. 6.2 6762. 7.8 2520. 39.4 279. .4 395. .5 116. 41.6 728. 1.1 1010. 1.2 282. 38.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 31. .0 97. .1 66. 212.9 100.0 87019. 100.0 13183. 26.4 ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION. 87J NET TAX BURDEN EFFECTIVE TAX RATE falfYfiii!lffif alftfiflf aitlf!lifisiiffffifiifi! ■!iliaiii BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ BASE ALT. AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT PCT. .... .... PCT. PCT. 0 000'S) (1000'S) ...... 0 000'S) ..... .... .... 205. .4 209. .4 4. 2.0 .88 .90 253. .5 304. .6 51. 20.2 1.68 2.02 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 256. .5 346. .7 90. 35.2 1.96 2.65 15088. 29.3 15107. 29.1 19. .1 1.13 1.13 5763. 11.2 5294. 10.2 -469. -8.1 3.55 3.26 4229. 8.2 3"0. 6.6 -789. -18.7 4.26 3.47 1266. 2.5 1850. 3.6 5". 46.1 2.20 3.22 125". 24.9 12161. 23.4 -683. -5.3 4.40 4.17 Z254. 4.4 1909. 3.7 -345. -15.3 4.54 4.10 4909. 9.5 7094. 13.7 21115. 44.5 4.97 7.18 3485. 6.8 3189. 6.1 -296. -8.5 3.94 3.60 274. .5 390. .8 116. 42.3 4.76 6.78 728. 1.4 534. 1.0 -194. -26.6 5.57 4.09 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15. ...... .0 ..... 52. .1 37. ....... 246.7 .31 1.09 51568. 100.0 ...... 51877. ..... 100.0 309. ..... .6 .... .... 2.29 2.30 TAX CREDITS (100015) HOMESTEAD TACONITE HOMESTEAD MISC. AG MON-AG TOTAL AG NON -AG TOTAL AG CREDT MISC. AG BUSINESS TOTAL ........ ........ ........ ................ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ 119. 15890. 16009. 0 0 0 215. 1. 1043. 17268. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34099. 1043. 35142. ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ ........ -119.-15890.-16009. 0 0 0 -215. 34098. 0 17374. -100.0 -100.0 -100.0 0 0 0 -100.0 3409800.0 0 103.5 TOTAL MILL RATE maaaaasifslu BASELINE: 126.4 ALTERNATIVE: 97.2 REGION: 1 ' PROPER TY TAX S 1 N U L A T 1 OM NORTHWEST CITIES (RDC 1") ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HOMESTEAD PARCEL REPORT: NON -AG HOMESTEADS ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 87J TAXES BEFORE PROPERTY TAX REFUND ................................ NONE / 1 HOME / 2 HONE 0 3 HONE N 4 (113 BELOW AVG VALUE) .......................... (AVERAGE VALUE) .......................... (1/3 ABOVE AVG VALUE) .......................... (COMPARATIVE .......................... VALUE) BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ MARKET VALUE 22600. 22600. 0 33800. 33800. 0 44900. 44900. 0 60400. 60400. 0 GROSS TAX 514. 2". -52.2 769. 3". -52.2 1021. 488. -52.2 1374. 657. -52.2 HOMESTEAD CREDT -275. 0 -415. 0 -552. 0 -700. 0 TACONITE CREDIT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NET TAX 237. 2". 3.9 354. 368. 3.9 470. 488. 3.9 674. 657. -2.5 EFFECTIVE RATE 1.05 1.09 1.05 1.09 1.05 1.09 1.12 1.09 REGION: 3 ' PROPER T Y TAX S I MULAT I ON NORTNCENTRAL CITIES (ROC 2L5) ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATI011: 87J KUKET VALUE ASSESSED VALUE psafafYaaaaitYataaaaaaipaaaafaaaaaaaaiifiafaa BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ aafaaaaalfaafiOApataaialaffiiifaiaitiataiaiafa BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE ...... PROPERTY CLASS AMDIBIT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... ............ AMOUNT ...... PCT. ........---- AMOUNT PCT. ..... AMOUNT ---- PCT. .............. 0 000'S) 0 000'S) 0 000'S) 0 000'S) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ...... 0 000'S) ..... AG HS 19749. 1.4 19749. 1.4 0 0 2987. .9 4104. .7 1117. 37.4 AG NON-HS 4040. .3 4040. .3 0 0 727. .2 1690. .3 963. 132.5 TIMBERLANDS 3819. .3 3819. .3 0 0 W. .2 1528. .2 841. 122.4 SEAS-REC-RES'AL 241767. 16.9 241767. 16.9 0 0 50771. 15.0 145060. 23.1 94289. 185.7 RESIDENTIAL HS 673158. 47.5 673158. 47.5 0 0 125127. 37.0 147566. 23.5 22739. 18.2 RES NON-HS 93211. 6.5 93211. 6.5 0 0 260". 7.7 55927. 8.9 29828. 114.3 APARTMENTS 29716. 2.1 29716. 2.1 0 0 10104. 3.0 17830. 2.3 7726. 76.5 SUBSIDIZED APT$ 39166. 2.7 39166. 2.7 0 0 6684. 2.0 23500. 3.7 16816. 251.6 COMMERCIAL 244987. 17.1 244967. 17.1 0 0 85279. 25.2 176882. 28.2 91603. 107.4 INDUSTRIAL 18112. 1.3 18112. 1.3 0 0 7311. 2.2 13584. 2.2 6273. 85.8 .UTILITY i PIERS 39356. 2.3 39356. 2.8 0 0 16432. 4.9 29459. 4.7 13027. 79.3 ENTERPRISE ZONE 8. .0 8. .0 0 0 2. .0 6. .0 4. 200.0 VACANT LAND 7037. .5 7037. .5 0 0 2815. .8 5278. .8 2463. 87.5 RAILROAD 5878. .4 5878. .4 0 0 2523. .7 4409. .7 1881. 74.4 MINUAL 1. .0 1. .0 0 0 0 0 1. .0 1. 100.0 D! ED NMSTD 3910. .3 3910. ...... .3 ..... 0 0 195. .1 752. .1 587. 301.0 TOTAL ----.. 1428917. ._... 100.0 1428917. 100.0 ...... 0 ..... 0 ...... 337749. ..... 100.0 ------ 627904. ----- 100.0 ...... 290155. ..... 85.9 LEVIES 0 D00'S) ■aaasaaaaastiasssaaasaassssasaasaaaaasasasasssaaaassasasaaiaaiaasasaassa TAX COUNTY CITY/TOWN SCHOOL SPECIAL .......... TOTAL INCREMENT BASELINE: .......... 12768. .......... 9221. .......... 17703. 110. .......... 39802. ......... 68. ALTERNATIVE: 12966. 17668. 17760. 112. 48526. 83. CHANGE: .......... 213. .......... 8"7. .......... 57. .......... .......... 2. 8724. ......... 15. PCT. CHANGE: 1.7 91.6 .3 1.8 21.9 22.1 ASSESSED VALUES 0 000'S) ississsisasssssasaaasssaa:asasasas FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX...................... INCREMENT CONTRIBUTN DISTRIBUTN .......... .......... .......... 580. 0 0 1015. 0 0 .......... .......... .......... 435. 0 0 75.0 0 0 r REGION: 3 ' PROPERTY TAX S I N U L A T I ON NORTNCENTRAL CITIES (RDC 2i5) ' r BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 871 GROSS TAX BURDEN MET TAX BURDEN EFFECTIVE ppYipippap tiipWppiilitgitipii■pisY pipppiWpaippiY TAX RATE BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ BASELINE ............ itiiiatiiiiiiiiiiitiaaiti ALTERNATIVE CHANGE piiiiiii BASE ALT. PROPERTY CLASS .............. AMOUNT •..... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ----- AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... ............ AMOUNT ...... PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. .... .... PCT. PCT. 0 000'S) (1000'S) (100015) 0 000'S) (100013) ..... ...... ..... 0 000'S) .... .... AG NS 350. .9 335. .7 -15. -4.3 155. .5 160. .5 S. 3.2 .78 .81 AG NON-HS 86. .2 135. .3 49. 57.0 67. .2 75. .2 8. 11.9 1.66 1.66 TIMBERLANDS 63. .2 73. .2 10. 15.9 51. .2 55. .2 4. 7.8 1.34 1." SEAS•REC-RES'AL 4561. 11.4 63". 13.1 1803. 39.5 4142. 13.1 5210. 16.5 1068. 25.8 1.71 2.15 RESIDENTIAL HS 15233. 38.2 12380. 25.5 -2853. -18.7 7556. 24.0 7335. 23.3 -221. -2.9 1.11 1.08 RES NON•HS 3263. 8.2 5046. 10.4 1783. 54.6 3263. 10.3 2916. 9.2 -347. -10.6 3.50 3.13 APARTMENTS 1254. 3.1 ISM. 3.3 331. 26.4 1254. 4.0 954. 3.0 -300. -23.9 4.22 3.21 SUBSIDIZED APTS 883. 2.2 2358. 4.9 1475. 167.0 ISM 2.8 1323. 4.2 "0. 49.8 2.25 3.38 CC/�IERCIAL 10385. 26.0 15199. 31.3 4814. 46.4 10380. 32.9 9152. 29.0 -1228. -11.3 4.24 3.74 INDUSTRIAL 950. 2.4 1321. 2.7 371. 39.1 950. 3.0 763. 2.4 -187. -19.7 5.25 4.21 UTILITY i PERS 2140. 5.4 28". 5.9 704. 32.9 2140. 6.8 2541. 9.0 701. 32.8 S." 7.22 ENTERPRISE ZONE 0 0 1. .0 1. 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VACANT LAND 357. .9 483. 1.0 126. 35.3 357. 1.1 40. 1.5 126. 35.3 5.07 6.86 RAILROAD 323. .8 415. .9 92. 28.5 323. 1.0 230. .7 -93. -28.8 5.50 3.91 MINERAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - DISABLED NMSTO 24. ...... .1 ..... 69. ...... .1 ..... 45. ...... 187.5 ..... 11. ...... .0 39. .1 28. 254.5 .23 1.00 TOTAL 39670. 100.0 48609. 100.0 8739. 21.9 31531. ----- 100.0 ...... ..... 31537. 100.0 ...... ..... 6. .0 .2.21 .... .... 2.21 iipptppapaiippiiiiiapiippipitiiiiiiii■ TAX CREDITS 0 000'S) ■itipipipiaiiipiiiiaaiptiiiiaiiiipipiapii NOMESTEAD TACONITE HOMESTEAD ............................ ............................ MISC. AG ........ NON -AG ........ TOTAL AG ........ NON -AG TOTAL AG CREDT MISC. AG BUSINESS TOTAL BASELINE: 126. ........ 7690. 7316. 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ 0 ........ 523. 0 ........ ........ 0 8340. ALTERNATIVE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17072. 0 17072. ............ CHANGE: ........ -126. ........ ........ -7690. -7816. ........ 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ 0 ........ -523. 17072. ........ ........ 0 8732. PCT. CHANGE: •100.0 -100.0 -100.0 0 0 0 -100.0 0 0 104.7 TOTAL KILL RATE apaatiiipaiti BASELINE: 118.0 ALTERNATIVE: 77.4 ' ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL REGIOMi: 3 ' P R O P E R T Y T A X S l M U L A T 1 0 N ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT NORTNCENTRAL CITIES (RDC 20) ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 SIMULATION: 871 BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY ' ' ' ' ' ' ' - VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HOMESTEAD PARCEL REPORT: NON -AG HOMESTEADS OiiiiiiiiliiiiAiMiii ii ii i iiif TAXES BEFORE PROPERTY TAX REFUND • ............................... NONE / 1 HOE / 2 HOE B 3 HOME 8 4 (1/3 BELOW AVG VALUE) (AVERAGE VALUE) .......................... (1/3 ABOVE AVG VALUE) .......................... (COMPARATIVE VALUE) .......................... .......................... BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ MARKET VALUE 23100. 23100. 0 34500. 34500. 0 45800. 45800. 0 60400. 60400. 0 GROSS TAX 491. 224. •54.3 M. 335. •54.3 973. KS. •54.3 1283. 587. •54.3 HOMESTEAD CREDT •265. 0 •3%. 0 •526. 0 -693. 0 TACONITE CREDIT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MET TAX Z26. 224. •.6 337. 335. •.6 448. "S. -.6 590. 587. •.6 EFFECTIVE RATE .96 .97 .96 .97 .98 .97 .98 ..97 REGION: 5 ' PROPERTY TAX S I M U L A T 1 ON NORTHEAST CITIES (ROC 3) ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAW VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' .SIMULATION: 811 MARKET VALUE ASSESSED VALUE iiiiigigiiiqMiqqiiiiitpgigiiiiiiiiiiiiii ggiiiiiiqqtqiiiiqqqii Miiiiiii ii■ifggii BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE PROPERTY CLASS .............. AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... ............ AMOUNT PCT. ...... ..... ............ AM"T PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. (1000'S) 0 000'S) 0 000'S) ...... 0 000'S) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ----- AG HS 5098. .3 5096. .3 0 0 723. .2 1020. .1 297. 41.1 AG N6M-NS 988. .1 968. .1 0 0 178. .0 428. .1 250. 140.4 TIMBERLANDS 2723. .2 2723. .2 0 0 490. .1 1089. .2 5". 122.2 SEAS-REC-RES'AL 14881. .8 14881. .8 0 0 3125. .7 8928. 1.3 5803. 185.7 RESIDENTIAL NS 1100807. 62.1 1100807. 62.1 0 0 200289. 45.9 228738. 32.9 28449. 14.2 RES MOM -MS 103024. 5.8 103024. 5.8 0 O 28847. 6.6 61814. 8.9 32967. 114.3 APARTMENTS 54872. 3.1 54872. 3.1 0 0 18113. 4.1 32923. 4.7 14810. 81.8 SUBSIDIZED APTS 31274. 1.8 31274. 1.3 0 0 6306. 1.4 18765. 2.7 12459. 197.6 COlERCIAL 212624. 12.0 212624. 12.0 0 0 80976. 18.5 158896. 22.9 77920. 96.2 INDUSTRIAL 93745. 5.3 93745. 5.3 0 0 39776. 9.1 70309. 10.1 30533. 76.8 UTILITY t PERS 112437. 6.3 112437. 6.3 0 0 43480. 10.0 84328. 12.1 40848. 93.9 ENTERPRISE ZONE 10566. .6 105". .6 0 0 3696. .8 7924. 1.1 4225. 114.4 VACANT LAND 14131. .8 14131. .8 0 0 5652. 1.3 10596. 1.5 4946. 87.5 RAILROAD 10897. .6 10897. .6 0 0 4666. 1.1 3173. 1.2 3487. 74.4 MINERAL 10. .0 10. .0 0 0 5. .0 7. .0 2. 40.0 DISABLED NMSTD 5747. ...... .3 ..... 5747. ...... .3 ..... 0 0 237. .1 1149. .2 862. 300.3 TOTAL 1773823. 100.0 1773823. 100.0 ...... ..... 0 0 ...... 436628. ..... 100.0 ...... 695090. ..... 100.0 ...... ZS8462. ..... 59.2 LEVIES 0 000'S) TAX COUNTY .......... CITY/TOWN .......... SCHOOL .......... SPECIAL TOTAL INCREMENT BASELINE: 27924. 20168. 25108. .......... .......... 174. 73375. ......... 3891. ALTERNATIVE: 26994. .......... 37337. .......... 25118. 171. 89621. 5392. CHANGE: -930. 17169. .......... 10. .................... -3. 16246. ......... 1501. PCT. CHANGE: -3.3 85.1 .0 -1.7 22.1 38.6 ASSESSED VALUES 0 000'S) iiiigiiiiiiiiitiiiiifi2iii=Siiili FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX----------------*----- INCREMENT CONTRIBUTM DISTRIBUTN .......... .......... .......... 21362. 0 0 37383. 0 0 .......... .......... .......... 16021. 0 0 75.0 0 0 REGION: 5 ' ►ROPE R T Y TAX S I M U L A T 1 ON NORTHEAST CITIES (RDC 3) ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY Vs. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NOMESTEAD PARCEL REPORT: NOW -AG MCMESTEADS ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 07/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 87J TAXES BEFORE PROPERTY TAX REFUND ................................ Now 9 1 NONE / 2 NONE / 3 HOME 0 4 (1/3 BELOW AVG VALUE) (AVERAGE VALUE) .......................... (1/3 ABOVE AVG VALUE) (COMPARATIVE VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT .......................... BASE ALT PCT .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ......-- MARKET VALUE 23600. 23600. 0 35300. 35300. 0 46900. 46900. 0 60400. 60400. 0 GROSS TAX 751. 358. -52.3 1123. 536. -52.3 1492. 712. -52.3 1921. 917. -52.3 MONESTEAD CREDT -405. 0 -606. 0 -700. 0 -700. 0 TACONITE CREDIT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MET TAX 345. 358. 3.6 516. 536. 3.8 792. 712. -10.1 1221. 917. -24.9 EFFECTIVE RATE 1." 1.52 1." 1.52 1.69 1.52 2.02 1.52 REGION: 7 ' PROPER T Y TAX S I M U L A T 1 ON TACONITE CITIES ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VB. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PRCPERTY CLASS .............. AG NS AG NON•HS TIMBERLANDS SEAS-REC-RES'AL RESIDENTIAL NS RES NON-HS APARTMENTS SUBSIDIZED APTS COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL UTILITY L PEAS ENTERPRISE ZONE VACANT LAND RAILROAD MINERAL ^' LED HMSTD -iAL MARKET VALUE BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE ............ AM"T PCT. ..... ............ AMOLNIT PCT. ............ AMOLRIT PCT. ...... 0 000'S) ...... (100013) ..... ...... ..... (100013) 2380. .2 2380. .2 0 0 394. .0 394. .0 0 0 12185. 1.0 12185. 1.0 0 0 23162. 1.3 23162. 1.8 0 0 794954. 62.2 794954. 62.2 0 0 72676. 5.7 72676. 5.7 0 0 27129. 2.1 27129. 2.1 0 0 38460. 3.0 38460. 3.0 0 0 157681. 12.3 157681. 12.3 0 0 59312. 4.6 59312. 4.6 0 0 628%. 4.9 628%. 4.9 0 0 52. .0 52. .0 0 0 8186. .6 8186. .6 0 0 $140. .6 8140. .6 0 0 7401. .6 7401. .6 0 0 3786. .3 3786. .3 0 0 1278793. 100.0 1278793. 100.0 0 0 ASSESSED VALUE ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 87J BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE A110IR(T ...... PCT. APK MT PCT. ............ AMOLUT PCT. (100013) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ..... ...... ..... (1000'S) 350. .1 482. .1 132. 37.7 71. .0 161. .0 90. 126.8 2193. .7 4374. 1.0 2681. 122.3 43". 1.6 13897. 2.3 9033. 185.7 143616. 47.4 161087. 32.9 17471. 12.2 20349. 6.7 43606. 8.9 23257. 114.3 9224. 3.0 16277. 3.3 7053. 76.5 6759. 2.2 23076. 4.7 16317. 241.4 56653. 18.7 117587. 24.0 61234. 108.1 24488. 8.1 444". 9.1 19996. $1.7 23890. 7.9 46750. 9.5 22560. 95.7 10. .0 39. .0 29. 2" .0 3274. 1.1 6140. 1.3 23". 87.5 3500. 1.2 6105. 1.2 2605. 74.4 3700. 1.2 5551. 1.1 1851. 50.0 189. .1 757. .2 568. 300.5 303132. 100.0 491172. 100.0 188040. 62.0 LEVIES (100013) pYipaisiiiiiiii00iiiiiiiiipipii!!!!alasaa! Yaasilaiaaaii!liif iiai TAX COUNTY .......... CITY/TOWN .......... SCHOOL SPECIAL .......... TOTAL INCREMENT BASELINE: 18852. 18060. .......... 13585. 159. .......... 50657. ......... 1003. ALTERNATIVE: 17730. 31370. 12807. 150. 62056. 1385. CHANGE: .......... -1122. .......... 13310. .......... -778. .......... -9. .......... 11399. ......... 382. PCT. CHANGE: -6.0 73.7 -5.7 -5.7 22.5 38.1 ASSESSED VALUES (1000'S) is!lasssii:lsawiaoass ua as sl:ass FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX...................... INCREMENT CONTRIBUTM DISTRIBUTN .......... .......... .......... 5033. 0 0 8816. 0 0 .......... .......... .......... 3778. 0 0 75.0 0 0 PROPERTY TAX MODEL REGION: 7 ' P R 0► E R T Y T A X S I M U L A T I O N ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT TACONITE CITIES 87/02/11 13.18.07 SIMULATION: 87J BASELINE: EST 1 MA T ED PAYABLE 198 7 : CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GROSS TAX BURDEN iiiiiiia ggaaiqY ggiOqaappiiiaa pa BASELINE ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE PROPERTY CLASS ............ AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... ............ AMOUNT PCT. ...... ..... .............. 0 000'S) 0 000'S) 0 000'S) . AG NS 57. .1 59. .1 2. 3.5 AG NON-HS 10. .0 15. .0 S. 50.0 TIMBERLANDS 351. .7 576. .9 225. ".1 SEAS-REC-RES'AL 601. 1.2 974. 1.5 373. 62.1 RESIDENTIAL NS 25322. 49.0 22403. 35.3 -2919. -11.5 RES NON-HS 3507. 6.8 5845. 9.2 2338. 66.7 APARTMENTS 1477. 2.9 19". 3.1 469. 31.8 SUBSIDIZED APTS 1195. 2.3 3196. 5.0 2003. 167.6 COMMERCIAL 9484. 18.4 14985. 23.6 5501. 58.0 INDUSTRIAL 3813. 7.4 5136. 6.2 1368. 35.8 UTILITY 8 PERS 3900. 7.5 5601. 8.8 1701. 43.6 ENTERPRISE ZONE 2. .0 7. .0 5. 250.0 VACANT LAID 5". 1.1 803. 1.3 259. 47.6 RAILROAD 604. 1.2 826. 1.3 222. 36.8 MINERAL 755. 1.5 911. 1.4 156. 20.7 DISABLED NMSTO 33. .1 107. .2 74. 224.2 TOTAL 51660. 100.0 63"1. 100.0 11731. 22.8 MET TAX I UNDEN EFFECTIVE TAX RATE iisasaaipagigasaappaa:ipisaaaasasspiiisiq siipa:si BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE RASE ALT. AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. ...... PCT. PCT. ...... 0 000'S) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ..... ..... 0 000'S) .... .... 16. .0 16. .1 0 0 .67 .67 8. .0 8. .0 0 0 2.03 2.03 270. .8 293. 1.0 23. 3.5 2.22 2.40 531. 1.6 636. 2.1 105. 19.8 2.29 2.75 6316. 19.5 4207. 13.9 -2109. -33.4 .79 .53 3507. 10.8 2965. 9.8 -542. -15.5 4.83 4.09 1477. 4.6 1129. 3.7 -3". -23.6 5.44 4.16 1195. 3.7 1635. 5.4 "0. 36.9 3,11 4.25 9484. 29.2 8672. 28.7 -812. -8.6 6.01 5.50 3818. 11.8 2942. 9.7 •876. -22.9 6.44 4.96 3900. 12.0 5579. 18.5 1679. 43.1 6.20 8.87 2. .0 4. .0 2. 100.0 3.85 7.69 5". 1.7 803. 2.7 259. 47.6 6.65 9.81 604. 1.9 406. 1.3 -198. -32.8 7.42:4.99 755. 2.3 911. 3.0 156. 20.7 10.2012.31 A. .0 20. .1 12. 150.0 .21 .53 ...... ..... 32434. 100.0 ...... 30225. ..... 100.0 ...... ..... -2209. -6.8 .... .... 2.54,2.36 TAX CREDITS (100013) HOMESTEAD TACONITE HOMESTEAD ............................ ............................ MISC. AG NOW -AG TOTAL AG NOM•AG TOTAL AG CREDT MISC. AG ........ BUSINESS ........ TOTAL ........ BASELINE: ........ 21. ........ 12738. ........ 12759. ........ ........ ........ 10. 6293. 6303. ........ 161. 2. 0 19225. ALTERNATIVE: 0 0 0 16. 7028. 70". ........ 0 ........ 26173. ........ 0 ........ 33217. ........ ............ CHANGE: ........ -21. ........ -12738. ........ -12759. ........ ........ 6. 735. 741. -161. 26171. 0 13992. PCT. CHANGE: -100.0 -100.0 -100.0 60.0 11.7 11.8 -100.0 1308550.0 0 72.8 TOTAL MILL RATE i iai■aaiaai iaia BASELINE: 169.9 ALTERNATIVE: 125.7 PROPERTY TAX MODEL REGION: 7 ' P R 0► E R T Y T A X 2 1 M U L A T 1 0 N ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT TACONITE CITIES ' ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 SIMULATIOA: 871 �' • • • • • ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1967: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1967: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HOME 8 1 (1/3 BELOW AVG VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ................ HOMESTEAD PARCEL REPORT: NON -AG HOMESTEADS aaa aaaa a a za zaaass as a aazazaaaaaaa TAXES BEFORE PROPERTY TAX REFUND ................................ HOE 0 2 (AVERAGE VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........................ NOW # 3 (113 ABOVE AVG VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ................ ........ HOME 14 (CCMPARATIVE VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ ........ MARKET VALUE 19600. 19600. 0 29400. 29400. 0 39100. 39100. 0 60400. 60400. 0 GROSS TAX 600. 263. -56.2 a99. 394. •56.2 1196. 524. -56.2 184a. 809. -56.2 HOMESTEAD CREDT -324. 0 -486. 0 -646. 0 -7DO. 0 TACONITE CREDIT -132. -173. -239. -260. -239. -346. -520. -520. MET TAX 94. 99. -4.8 174. 134. -23.3 311. 178. -42.7 628. 289. -54.0 EFFECTIVE RATE .48 .46 .59 .46 .30 .46 1.04 .48 REGION: 9 ' PROPERTY TAX S I M U L A T I ON SOUTHWEST CITIES (RDC 6E 6Y 8) ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROPERTY CLASS .............. AG HS AG NON -HS TIMBERLANDS SEAS-REC-RES'AL RESIDENTIAL NS RES NON-H$ APARTMENTS SUBSIDIZED APT$ COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL UTILITY i KOS ENTERPRISE ZONE VACANT LAID RAILROAD MINERAL DIS"LED "TO TOTAL MARKET VALUE tiNi!l0iitliW!ltitli!!!liiOW!listt!!liit!! BASELINE ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ ............ AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. ------ ..... ...... 0 000'S) ..... ...... (100013) ..... 0 000'S) 27370. 1.0 27370. 1.0 0 0 21068. .8 210". .8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2673. .1 2673. .1 0 0 1780406. 63.4 1730406. 63.4 0 0 190707. 6.8 190707. 6.8 0 0 75807. 2.8 78807. 2.8 0 0 79935. 2.8 79935. 2.3 0 0 384640. 13.7 384640. 13.7 0 0 143852. 5.1 143852. 5.1 0 0 70605. 2.5 70605. 2.5 0 0 768. .0 768. .0 0 0 15174. .5 15174. .5 0 0 6053. .2 6853. .2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 60". .2 6059. .2 0 0 2808919. 100.0 2808919. 100.0 0 0 ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIM)LATION: 87J ASSESSED VALUE !i! BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. ...... ..... ...... (100013) ..... ...... (1000'S) ..... (100013) 4401. .7 5645. .5 12". 28.3 3792. .6 3612. .8 4820. 127.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 561. .1 1604. .2 1043. 185.9 324355. 49.0 371607. 34.9 47252. 14.6 53396. 8.1 114424. 10.8 61026. 114.3 26790. 4.0 47254. 4.4 20494. 76.5 13285. 2.0 47961. 4.5 34676. 261.0 137539. 20.8 233041. 27.1 150502. 109.4 59049. 8.9 107889. 10.1 48840. 82.7 29032. 4.4 52953. 5.0 23921. 82.4 275. .0 576. .1 301. 109.5 6069. .9 11330. 1.1 5311. 87.5 2947. .4 5140. .5 2193. 74.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 303. .0 1212. .1 909. 300.0 661797. 100.0 1064328. 100.0 402531. 60.8 LEVIES (1000'S) iii0!!!Y i!lYiii101Opiii!!i!!ii i qYY W lii t i/Otlii i iiii itOiiiii TAX COUNTY CITY/TOWN SCHOOL .......... SPECIAL .......... TOTAL .......... INCREMENT ......... BASELINE: .......... 18658. .......... 26982. 31517. 225. 77382. 3844. ALTERNATIVE: 19301. 46690. 31334. 223. 97548. 5158. CHANGE: .......... 643. .......... 19708. .......... -183. .......... -2. .......... 20166. .......-- 1314. PCT. CHANGE: 3.4 73.0 -.6 -.9 26.1 34.2 ASSESSED VALUES (1000'S) FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX...................... INCREMENT CONTRIBUTN DISTRIBUTN .......... .......... .......... 32293. 0 0 56513. 0 0 .......... .......... .......... 24220. 0 0 75.0 0 0 REGION: 9 ' PROPER T T TAX S I M U L A T 1 0 N SOUTHWEST CITIES (RDC 6E 6Y 8) ' • • ' ' • ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1907: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMJLATIQI: 57J GROSS TAX BURDEN MET TAX BURDEN EFFECTIVE asaaaa aasssssaasaasavasaaaas sasoasazaaasazs::sssasaaa:zaasssssazzzaaaazaaa TAX RATE aszssssss BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ BASE ALT. .... PROPERTY CLASS AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. AMOUNT PCT. ..... AMOUNT PCT. .... PCT. PCT. .............. ...... (1000'S) ..... (1000'S) (1000'S) ..... 0 000'S) ...... (1000'S) ...... ..... (1000'S) .... .... AG NS 530. .7 553. .5 23. 4.3 279. .5 268. .4 -11. -3.9 1.02 .98 AG NON-NS 452. .6 821. .8 369. 31.6 339. .6. 422. .7 83. 24.5 1.61 2.00 TIMBERLANDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SEAS-REC-RES'AL 75. .1 134. .1 59. 78.7 70. .1 91. .1 21. 30.0 2.62 3.40 RESIDENTIAL NS 40247. 49.5 36543. 33.6 -3704. -9.2 19745. 32.7 19790. 32.1 45. .2 1.11 1.11 RES NON-NS 6606. 8.1 11187. 10.9 4581. 69.3 6606. 10.9 6067. 9.9 -539. .-8.2 3.46 3.18 APARTMENTS 3176. 3.9 4302. 4.2 1126. 35.5 3176. 5.3 2728. 4.4 -448. -14.1 4.03 3.46 SUBSIDIZED AM 1622. 2.0 4696. 4.6 3074. 189.5 1622. 2.7 2501. 4.1 879. 54.2 2.03 3.13 COMMERCIAL 16718. 20.6 27495. 26.8 10777. 64.5 16714. 27.7 17092. 27.8 378. 2.3 4.35 4.44 INOLISTRIAL 7027. 8.7 9923. 9.7 2901. 41.3 7026. 11.6 5952. 9.7 -1074. -15.3 4.88 4.14 UTILITY i PEWS 3594. 4.4 5270. 5.1 1676. 46.6 3594. 6.0 5252. 8.5 1658. 46.1 5.09 7.44 ENTERPRISE ZONE 51. .1 $7. .1 36. 70.6 51. .1 45. .1 -6. -11.8 6.64 5.86 VACANT LAID 732. .9 1061. 1.0 329. 44.9 732. 1.2 1061. 1.7 329. 44.9 4.82 6.99 RAILROAD 359. .4 507. .5 148. 41.2 359. .6 255. .4 -104. -29.0 5.24 3.72 MINERAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ILED NMSTD 36. .0 121. - -- .1 ----- W . 218.4 18. .0 63. .1 45. 250.0 .30 1.04 TOTAL ........... 81226. 100.0 --- 102706. 100.0 ........... 21480. 26.4 ........... 60330. 100.0 ........... 61588. 100.0 ...... ..... 1258. 2.1 ........ 2.15 2.19 OapaiaYaaNaaNaiM TAX CREDITS (10000j) aaaaaaaiaaaaaaaaiaaaassiaaaaaaiaiaiasiiaiiaaaiaaiaiaaiasfaa HOMESTEAD TACONITE HOMESTEAD ............................ ............................ MISC. AG NON -AG TOTAL AG NON -AG TOTAL AG CREDT MISC. AG BUSINESS TOTAL BASELINE: ........ 116. ........ ........ 20522. 20638. ........ 0 ........ 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ 253. 1. ........ ........ 4. 20895. ALTERNATIVE: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41114. 4. 41117. ............ CHANGE: ........ -116. ........ -20522. ........ -20638. ........ 0 ........ 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ -253. 41113. ........ ........ 0 20222. PCT. CHANGE: -100.0 -100.0 -100.0 0 0 0 -100.0 4111300.0 0 96.8 TOTAL MILL RATE assaaaaaasaaasa BASELINE: 122.9 ALTERNATIVE: 96.9 REGION: 9 ' PRO►ER TY TAX S I MULAT I ON SOUTNIE ST CITIES (RDC 6E 6Y 8) ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VB. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NON: / 1 (1/3 BELOW AVG VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE MARKET VALUE 23700. 23700. 0 GROSS TAX 524. 252. •51.9 HOMESTEAD CREDT •283. 0 TACONITE CREDIT 0 0 NET TAX 241. 252. 4.6 EFFECTIVE RATE 1.02 1.06 HOMESTEAD PARCEL REPORT: NOM•AG HOMESTEADS weOYiiYi iiiiiii�ifiiiMOWiiiWi TAXES BEFORE ................................ PROPERTY TAX REFUND HOME / 2 NONE 0 3 (AVERAGE VALUE) .......................... (1/3 ABOVE AVG VALUE) BASE ALT PCT .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE 35400. 35400. 0 47000. 47000. 0 783. 377. •51.9 1040. 500. •51.9 -423. 0 -562. 0 0 0 0 0 360. 377. 4.6 478. 500. 4.6 1.02 1.06 1.02 1.06 ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 871 HOME N 4 (COMPARATIVE .......................... VALUE) BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE 60400. 60400. 0 1336. 643. •51.9 -700. 0 0 0 636. 643. 1.0 1.05 1.06 REGION. 11 ' IRO►ER T Y TAX S 1 MULAT I ON CENTRAL MM CITIES (RDC NOW ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1967: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROPERTY CLASS .............. AG NS AG NON •HS T I M BERLANDS SEAS•REC•RES'AL RESIDENTIAL NS RES NON•NS APARTMENTS SUBSIDIZED A►T$ COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL UTILITY i PERS ENTERPRISE ZONE VACANT LAID RAILROAD MINERAL DISABLED MMSTO TOTR, MARKET VALUE BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE AMOUNT ...... ►CT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. (100013) 0 000'S) ..... ...... ..... 0 000'S) 73153. 2.0 73153. 2.0 0 0 2055. .7 24755. .7 0 0 284. .0 284. .0 0 0 2160S. .6 21605. .6 0 0 1647921. 45.2 1647921. 45.2 0 0 208379. 5.7 208379. 5.7 0 0 190088. 5.2 190088. 5.2 0 0 80343. 2.2 80343. 2.2 0 0 487992. 13.4 487992. 13.4 0 0 147587. 4.0 147587. 4.0 0 0 703412. 19.3 703412. 19.3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44477. 1.2 4u77. 1.2 0 0 11297. .3 11297. .3 0 0 30. .0 30. .0 0 0 5572. .2 5572. .2 0 0 100.0 3646893. 100.0 0 0 LEVIES (1000'S) ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULAT;ON: 87J ASSESSED VALUE BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE AMOUNT ...... PCT. AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. 0 000'S) ..... ...... (100015) ..... ...... ..... 0 000'S) 11148. 1.1 15501. .9 4353. 39.0 4456. .5 10269. .6 5813. 130.5 51. .0 114. .0 63. 123.5 4537. .5 12963. .8 3426. 185.7 302723. 30.8 353973. 20.5 51250. 16.9 58346. 5.9 125027. 7.2 66681. 114.3 6452a. 6.6 114053. 6.6 49525. 76.7 13443. 1.4 48206. 2.3 34763. 258.6 183556. Ia.? 365078. 21.1 181522. 98.9 61236. 6.2 110690. 6.4 49404. 80.6 255433. 26.0 527548. 30.6 272115. 106.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 17791. 1.3 33357. 1.9 15566. 117.5 485a. .5 8473. .5 3615. 74.4 15. .0 22. .0 7. 46.7 279. .0 1114. .1 835. 299.3 96244a. 100.0 1726388. 100.0 743940. 75.7 TAX COUNTY .......... CITY/TOWN SCHOOL SPECIAL TOTAL INCREMENT BASELINE: 29518. .......... 23a22. .......... 49505. .......... .......... 1194. 104029. ......... 3"1. ALTERNATIVE: 31370. .......... 38918. 50815. 1213. 122321. 4270. CHANGE: 1852. .......... 15096. .......... 1310. .......... .......... 34. 18292. ......... 829. PCT. CHANGE: 6.3 63.4 2.6 2.9 17.6 24.1 ASSESSED VALUES (1000'S) FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX...................... INCREMENT CONTRIBUTM DISTRISUTN .......... .......... .......... 28178. 0 0 49311. 0 0 .......... .......... .......... 21133. 0 0 75.0 0 0 REGION: 11 ' ►RO►E R T Y TAX S 1 N U L A T I OM CENTRAL MN CITIES (RDC 7E&?W) ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1957: CURRENT LAY VS. - ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.13.07 ' SIMULATION: 87J GROSS TAX BURDEN MET TAX BURDEM EFFECTIVE TAX RATE a aasaaaaassasaasaauaaausau ssa:saaasaasaarasaasuaaaaaa:a:su:saaaa ssuua:a BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE CHANGE SASE ALT. PROPERTY CLASS .............. ANOINT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ----- AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... ............ AMOUNT PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. .... .... PCT. PCT. (1000'S) (100015) 0 000'S) 0 000'S) ...... ..... 0 000'S) ...... ..... 0 000'S) .... ..-- AG NS 1301. 1.2 1193. .9 -108. -8.3 597. .7 669. .7 72. 12.1 .82 AG MOM -HS $15. .5 786. .6 271. 52.6 389. .4 457. .5 66. 17.5 .91 1.57 1.85 TIMBERLANDS 5. .0 7. .0 2. 40.0 4. .0 4. .0 0 0 1.41 1.41 SEAS-REC-RES'AL 561. .5 1070. .8 509. 90.7 491. .6 659. .7 168. 34.2 2.27 3.05 RESIDENTIAL NS 36466. 33.9 30605. 24.2 -5861. -16.1 18370. 20.8 18922. 20.6 552. 3.0 1.11 1.15 RES NOW-NS 7011. 6.5 10779. 8.5 3768. 53.7 7011. 7.9 6768. 7.4 -243. -3.5 3.36 3.25 APARTMENTS 7695. 7.2 9789. 7.7 2094. 27.2 7695. 8.7 6638. 7.2 -1057. -13.7 4.05 3.49 SUBSIDIZED APT$ 1652. 1.5 4267. 3.4 2615. 158.3 1652. 1.9 2576. 2.8 924. 55.9 2.06 3.21 COMMERCIAL 21980. 20.5 31414. 24.8 9434. 42.9 21973. 24.8 21537. 23.5 -"1. -2.0 4.50 4.41 INDUSTRIAL An. 6.9 9631. 7.6 2209. 29.8 7422. 8.4 68". 7.5 -574. -7.7 5.03 4.64 UTILITY B PER$ 20165. 18.8 23476. 18.5 3311. 16.4 20165. 22.8 23473. 25.6 3308. 16.4 2.87 3.34 ENTERPRISE ZONE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VACANT LAID 2088. 1.9 2767. 2.2 679. 32.5 2088. 2.4 2767. 3.0 679. 32.5 4.69 6.22 RAILROAD 575. .5 710. .6 135. 23.5 575. .7 443. .5 -132. -23.0 5.09 3.92 MINERAL 2. .0 2. .0 0 0 2. .0 2. .0 0 0 6.67 6.67 DISABLED NMSTO 34. ------ ----- .0 96. ...... .1 ..... 62. ...... 182.4 ..... 16. ...... .0 59. .1 43. 268.8 .29 1.06 - TOTAL 107471. 100.0 126591. 100.0 19120. 17.8 ..... 88453. 100.0 ...... ..... 91823. 100.0 ...... ..... 3370. 3.3 .... .... 2.43 2.52 TAX CREDITS (1000'S) am+asaaasaawaaaosaauuaaaaaasuasssausaaausa:a a aaa ataaasa aaas:a: ss s:asu a:aaa:a HOMESTEAD TACONITE HOMESTEAD, ............................ ............................ MISC. AG ........ NON -AG ........ ........ TOTAL AG ........ MOM -AG ........ TOTAL AG CREDT MISC. AG BUSINESS TOTAL BASELINE: "1. 18114. 18376. 0 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ 433. 9. ........ ........ 0 19018. ALTERNATIVE: ............ ........ 0 0 ........ ........ 0 0 ........ 0 0 0 34768. 0 34768. CHANGE: -461. -18114. -18S76. 0 ........ 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ -433. 34759. ........ ........ 0 15750. PCT. CHANGE: -100.0 -100.0 -100.0 0 0 0 -100.0 386211.1 0 92.8 TOTAL HILL RATE aaaaaaaaasua BASELINE: 109.0 ALTERNATIVE: 72.9 REGION: 11 ' P A 0 P E A T Y TAX S I M U L A T I OM CENTRAL NO CITIES (RDC 7Ei7Y) ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY _ Vs. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL1) - .. HOMESTEAD PARCEL REPORT: NON -AG HOMESTEADS Oii gNiii W �NNi Bass TAXES BEFORE PROPERTY TAX REFUND ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.13.07 ' SIMULATION: 871 8 1 (1/3 BELOW AVG VALUE) 0 2 (AVERAGE VALUE) HOME / 3 (1/3 ABOVE AVG VALUE) HOME / 4 ....... .. ..... ........ .MOUE ............. (COMPARATIVE VALUE) BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT ...................... BASE ALT PCT ....... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ •....... PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ......-- MARKET VALUE 31400. 31400. 0 47000. 47000. 0 62500. 62500. 0 60400. 60400. 0 GROSS TAX 616. 262. -57.4 922. 393. -57.4 1226. 522. -57.4 1185. 505. -57.4 HOMESTEAD CREDT -333. 0 -496. 0 -662. 0 -640. 0 TACONITE CREDIT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 HET TAX 283. 262. -7.4 424. 393. -7.4 5". 522. -7.4 545. 505. -7.4 EFFECTIVE RATE .90 .84 •90 ,34 .90 .84 .90 .34 ' ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL REGION: 13 ' P R O P E R T Y T A X S I M U L A T I O N ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT SOUTHEAST CITIES (RDC 9910) ' ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 SIMULATION: 87J BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAW VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • . • MARKET VALUE ASSESSED VALUE BASELINE paaasssassssaaspaawsasaaw ALTERNATIVE CHANGE ............ ssaasswtssssassssasssssaassassss:assaaasssassss BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE CHANGE ............ ............ PROPERTY CLASS ............ AMOUNT PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT ...... KT. AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ...-- .............. ...... (1000'S) ..... ...... (1000'S) ..... ...... ..... 0 000'S) 0 000'S) ..... 0 000'S) (1000'S) AG NS 61567. .8 61567. .8 0 0 9885. .5 13442. .4 3557. 36.0 AG NOW •NS 39553. .5 39558. .5 0 0 7120. .4 166". .5 9568. 134.4 TIMBERLANDS 81. .0 81. .0 0 0 15. .0 33. .0 18. 120.0 SEAS-REC•RES'AL 6616. .1 6616. .1 0 0 1389. .1 3970. .1 2581. 185.8 RESIDENTIAL NS 4920371. 60.5 4920371. 60.5 0 0 909747. K.9 1080395. 32.8 170"S. 18.8 RES NON-NS 534111. 6.6 534111. 6.6 0 0 149551. 7.4 320467. 9.7 170916. 114.3 APARTMENTS 272964. 3.4 2729". 3.4 0 0 92560. 4.6 163778. 5.0 71218. 76.9 SUBSIDIZED APT$ 142419. 1.8 142419. 1.8 0 0 26252. 1.3 85451. 2.6 59199. 225.5 COMMERCIAL 115008. 14.2 1150838. 14.2 0 0 441648. 21.8 862588. 26.2 420940. 95.3 INDUSTRIAL 431134. 5.3 431134. 5.3 0 0 ISMS. 8.9 323351. 9.8 142966. 79.3 UTILITY i PENS 507080. 6.2 507080. 6.2 0 0 185109. 9.1 380307. 11.6 195196. 105.5 ENTERPRISE ZONE 257. .0 257. .0 0 0 54. .0 193. .0 139. 257.4 VACANT LAUD 46105. .6 46105. .6 0 0 18442. .9 34579. 1.1 16137. 87.5 RAILROAD 4772. .1 4772. .1 0 0 2052. .1 3579. .1 1527. 74.4 MINERAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DISABLED IMSTO 15040. .2 15040. .2 0 ...... ..... 0 752. .0 ..... 3008. ...... .1 ..... ZZ56. ...... 300.0 ..... TOTAL .... 8132913. .---- 100.0 --•••• 8132913. ..... 100.0 0 0 ..... 2024963. 100.0 3291828. 100.0 1266865. 62.6 LEVIES (1000'S) sassswa�ssaasassasaassssaasasasssssawwswwssassaaaaaaaaawan TAX COUNTY CITY/TOWN SCHOOL SPECIAL TOTAL INCREMENT BASELINE: .......... 60008. .......... 73688. .......... 108302. .......... 626. .......... 242624. ......... 6566. ALTERNATIVE: 63132. 118S92. 109129. 640. 291494. 8511. ......•.. CHANGE: .......... 3124. .......... 44904. .......... 827. .......... 14. .......... 48870. 1945. KT. CHANGE: 5.2 60.9 .8 2.2 20.1 29.6 ASSESSED VALUES 0 000'S) sassssssaasassassasasassssssssa FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX...................... INCREMENT CONTRIBUTM DISTRIBUTH .......... .......... .......... 53225. 0 0 93145. 0 0 .......... .......... .......... 39920. 0 0 75.0 0 0 REGION: 13 ' PROPERTY TAX SIMULAT ION SOUTHEAST CITIES (ADC 9910) ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY Vs. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERMOR'S.PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 871 GROSS TAX @MEN NET TAX BURDEN EFFECTIVE NO!li0ilaii!!lsosa\\iiiilss\\aaias■ BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE wlsssaalaasaaa!!wlaalsasa\s:a:sisiaiaaaastii\s aTE s ==*iia . ... ............ ............ ALTERNATIVE CHANGE BASE ALT. PROPERTY CLASS AMOUNT ►CT. .. AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT PCT. ...... ..... -BASELINE ------.. AMOUNT PCT. ------------ AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. PCT. PCT. (100015) (100013) (1000'S) ...... (100013) ..... .... (1000'S) (1000'S) AG NS 1249. .5 1289. .4 40. 3.2 670. .3 705. .4 35. 5.2 1.09 1.15 AG MON-HS 906. .4 1612. .5 706. 77.9 696. .4 930. .5 234. 33.6 1.76 2.35 TIMBERLANDS 1. .0 2. .0 1. 100.0 1. .0 1. .0 0 0 1.23 1.23 SEAS-REC-RES'AL 185. .1 402. .1 217. 117.3 160. .1 223. .1 63. 39.4 2.42 3.37 RESIDENTIAL NB 114524. ".0 103493. 34.5 -11031. -9.6 59004. 30.6 61992. 31.4 29W- 5.1 1.20 1.26 RES NON -NB 18667. 7.5 30219. 10.1 11552. 61.9 18667. 9.7 18439. 9.4 -228. -1.2 3.49 3.45 APARTMENTS 11486. 4.6 15137. 5.0 3651. 31.8 11436. 6.0 9641. 5.0 -1645. -14.3 4.21 3.61 SUBSIDIZED AM 3335. 1.3 8409. 2.3 5074. 152.1 3335. 1.7 4992. 2.5 1657. 49.7 2.34 3.51 COMMERCIAL 54770. 22.0 80336. 26.8 25566. 46.7 54769. 28.4 52911. 26.8 •1858. -3.4 4.76 4.60 INDUSTRIAL 22327. 9.0 30510. 10.2 8183. 36.1 22327. 11.6 18849. 9.6 -3475. -15.6 5.18 4.37 UTILITY j PERS 19079. 7.7 24660. 8.2 5581. 29.3 19079. 9.9 24625. 12.5 5546. 29.1 3.76 4.86 ENTERPRISE ZONE T. .0 19. .0 12. 171.4 7. .0 12. .0 5. 71.4 2.72 4.67 VACANT LAND 2300. .9 3269. 1.1 969. 42.1 2300. 1.2 3269. 1.7 969. 42.1 4.99 7.D9 RAILROAD 257. .1 348. .1 91. 35.4 257. .1 202. .1 •55. -21.4 5.39 4.23 MINERAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DISABLED MNNSTD 96. -... --;0 300. ------ .1 ..... 204. 212.5 ...... ..... 47. .0 174. .1 127. 270.2 .31 1.16 TOTAL 249190. 100.0 300005. 100.0 50815. 20.4 .. ..... 192806. 100.0 ._... 197164. 100.0 ...... 4358. .2.3 2.37 2.42 TAX CREDITS (10001S) HOMESTEAD TACONITE HOMESTEAD ..................... AG NON -AG ....... ........ TOTAL ............................ Are NON -AG ........ ........ TOTAL AG CREDT MISC. AG MISC. BUSINESS TOTAL BASELINE: 291. 55570. 55861. 0 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ 523. 0 ........ •----- 0 56384. ALTERNATIVE: 0 ..... 0 ....... ........ 0 0 0 ........ 0 0 102541. 0 102841. CHANGE: -291. 55570. 55861. ........ 0 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ -523. 102341. ....... ........ 0 46457. PCT. CHANGE: -100.0 -100.0 -100.0 0 0 0 -100.0 0 0 82.4 TOTAL MILL RATE !i■a\\\ii\\ii\! BASELINE: 123.1 ALTERNATIVE: 91.1 I ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL REGION: 13 • P R O► E R T Y T A X S I M U L A T 1 0 M ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT SOUTHEAST CITIES (RDC 9910) ' ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 871 BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY ' VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1967: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) • . • . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MARKET VALUE GROSS TAM( HOESTEM CREDT TACONITE CREDIT MET TAX EFFECTIVE RATE MOTE STEAD PARCEL REPORT: NON•AG HOMESTEADS eau �up�us uaa uuruauussasss TAXES BEFORE PROPERTY TAX REFUND ................................ HOME / 1 HOME 0 2 HOME / 3 NONE 0 4 (1/3 BELOW AVG VALUE) .......................... (AVERAGE VALUE) .......................•.. (1/3 ABOVE AVG VALUE) ........................•. (COMPARATIVE VALUE) BASE ALT ►CT BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ ►ROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ 290W. 29e00. 0 44i00. 44600. 0 59300. 59300. 0 60400. 60400. 0 660. 323. -51.1 988. 483. •51.1 1313. 643. -51.1 1338. 655. •51.1 •356. 0 •SM. 0 •700. 0 -700. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 304. 323. 6.4 454. 40. 6.4 613. 643. 4.8 638. 655. 2.6 1.02 1.06 1.02 1.08 1.03 1.08 1.06 1.08 REGION: 15 ' PRO►ERTY TAX S I N U L A T 1 ON METRO CITIES EXCL MPLS&ST P. ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY _ VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROPERTY CLASS .............. AG NS AG NON -MS TIMBERLANDS SEAS•REC•RES'AL RESIDENTIAL NS RES NON-HS APARTMENTS SUBSIDIZED AM COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL UTILITY i PERS ENTERPRISE -ZONE VACANT LAID RAILROAD MINERAL DISABLED NINSTO Tr MARKET VALUE glgmiqiliq! BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE AMOUNT ...... PCT. ..... AMOUNT ...... PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. (100018) (100003) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ..... 311241. .7 311241. .7 0 0 304691. .7 304691. .7 0 0 621. .0 621. .0 0 0 66977. .1 66977. .1 0 0 28044486. 62.6 28044486. 62.6 0 0 2806583. 6.3 2806583. 6.3 0 0 2363818. 5.3 2363818. 5.3 0 0 339465. .8 33%M. .8 0 0 5999481. 13.4 5999481. 13.4 0 0 2739118. 6.1 2739118. 6.1 0 0 935194. 2.1 935194. 2.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 839975. 1.9 839975. 1.9 0 0 z"B2. .1 28382. .1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32542. .1 32542. .1 0 0 44812576. 100.0 44812576. 100.0 0 0 ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 871 ASSESSED VALUE ggii!!iiliqqqqqiiqqqi!liii ii qi qa qqf BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. ...... ..... ...... ..... ...... ..... (1000'S) 0 000'S) 0 000'S) 50520. .4 70918. .4 20398. 40.4 548". .5 125720. .6 70876. 129.2 112. .0 248. .0 136. 121.4 14065. .1 40186. .2 26121. 185.7 S683771. 47.9 8151952. 41.6 2468181. 43.4 785643. 6.6 1693950. 8.6 898107. 114.3 797621. 6.7 1418291. 7.2 620670. 77.8 74160. .6 203679. 1.0 129519. 174.6 2512662. 21.2 4499147. 22.9 1986485. 79.1 1161322. 9.8 2054339. 10.5 893017. 76.9 375295. 3.2 701368. 3.6 326073. 86.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 335990. 2.3 629981. 3.2 293991. 87.5 12204. .1 21236. .1 9092. 74.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1627. .0 6508. .0 4881. 300.0 11860037. 100.0 19607574. 100.0 7747537. 65.3 LEVIES 0 000'S) ggiai iiggiliiqiq ggiqlaiiqqiqq TAX COUNTY .......... CITY/TOWN .......... SCHOOL SPECIAL TOTAL INCREMENT BASELINE: 310119. 192938. .......... 565621. .......... 62690. .......... 1131369. ......--- 38763. ALTERNATIVE: 312357. .......... 255137. 566420. 62654. 1196568. 44902. CHANGE: 2238. .......... 62199. .......... 799. .......... -36. .......... 65199. ......... 6139. PCT. CHANGE: .7 32.2 .1 .1 5.8 15.8 ASSESSED VALUES 0 000'S) FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX.................... INCREMENT CONTRIBUTN DISTRIBUTN .......... .......... .......... 351863. 1043383. 995593. 615759. 1863184. 995593. .......... .......... .......... 2638%. 819801. 0 75.0 78.6 0 REGION: 15 ' ► R 0► E R T Y T A X 9 I M U L A T 1 0 M ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT METRO CITIES EXCL M►LS&ST P. ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 871 BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1957: CURRENT LAM ' - VS. . . . . . . . ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: . . . . . . . . . . . . . GOVERNOR'S . . . PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GROSS TAX BURDEN MET TAX BURDEN EFFECTIVE aaaaaaspsa TAX RATE _-BASELINE asasa■a■oaas■■■aaaa ALTERNATIVE .•KY. aria■a■as■aa■s■■w■s.■■■■■■�■■■:■:aa■as■■u■sa CHANGE BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE ■a:■■s:ss BASE ALT. PROPERTY CLASS .............. AMOUNT KT. .. ..... AMOUNT ...... ..... AMOUNT, ...... PCT. ..... - AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT.- . PCT. AMOUNT PCT. .... ... PCT. PCT. 0000'S) (1000'S) (100015) ...... (1000'S) ..... ...... ..... (1000'S) ...... ..... (1000'S) .... .... AG MS 5600. .4 $225. .4 -455. -8.0 3037. .3 3509. .3 472. 15.5 1.13 AG MON-MS 6205. .5 9273. .7 3068. 49.4 4634. .4 6627. .6 1993. 43.0 .96 1.52 2.17 TIMBERLANDS 12. .0 17. .0 5. 41.7 9. .0 11. .0 2. 22.2 1.45 1.77 SEAS-REC-RES'AL 1553. .1 2757. .2 1204. 77.5 1390. .1 2120. .2 730. 52.5 2.08 3.17 RESIDENTIAL HS 619118. 48.3 572191. 42.3 -46927. -7.6 388608. 37.1 424489. 40.2 35881. 9.2 1.39 1.51 RES NOW-NS 85641. 6.7 119318. 8.8 33677. 39.3 85"1. 8.2 88526. 8.4 2885. 3.4 3.05 3.15 APARTMENTS 86936. 6.8 101970. 7.5 15034. 17.3 86936. 8.3 77006. 7.3 -9930. -11.4 3.68 3.26 SUBSIDIZED ANTS 8124. .6 14696. 1.1 6574. 80.9 8124. .8 10911. 1.0 2787. 34.3 2.39 3.21 COMIERCIAL 264503. 20.6 295540. 21.3 31037. 11.7 264503. 25.3 239396. 22.7 -25105. -9.5 4.41 3.99 INDUSTRIAL 125311. 9.8 138740. 10.2 13429. 10.7 125311. 12.0 109755. 10.4 -15556. -12.4 4.57 4.01 UTILITY i PER$ 41149. 3.2 48458. 3.6 7309. 17.3 41149. 3.9 48454. 4.6 7305. 17.8 4.40 5.18 ENTERPRISE ZONE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 VACANT LAND 36650. 2.9 43539. 3.2 6889. 18.8 36650. 3.5 43539. 4.1 6889. 13.8 4.36 5.18 RAILROAD 1345. .1 1591. .1 246. 18.3 1345. .1 1172. .1 -173. -12.9 4.74 4.13 MINERAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0° 0 DISABLED HMSTO 179. .0 ......... 4". ...... .0 ..... 305. --......... 170.4 88. .0 341. .0 ............ 253. 287.5 .27 1.05 TOTAL 1282406. 100.0 1353801. 100.0 71395. 5.6 ........... 1047426. 100.0 1055860. 100.0 ...... .. $434. .8 2.34 2.36 TAX CREDITS (100013) a�■asasasoaaata■aaaasasaassaa■aaaasasou■s■■■aaaaat■aaaasapasaa■aasass:■aaa■aaaaaas■::asa.■ HOMESTEAD TACONITE HOMESTEAD ............................ ............................ MISC. AG ....... ........ MOM -AG ........ TOTAL AG ........ NON -AG ........ TOTAL AG CREDT MISC. AG BUSINESS TOTAL BASELINE: 1335. 230601. 231936. 0 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ 2896. 148. ....... 0 234980. ALTERNATIVE: ..-• .0 0 ....... ........ 0 0 ........ 0 0 0 297941. 0 297941. GRANGE: -1335.-230601. -231936. 0 ........ 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ 2896. 297793. ........ ........ 0 62%1. PCT. CHANGE: -100.0 -100.0 -100.0 0 0 0 -100.0 201211.5 0 26.8 TOTAL MILL RATE BASELINE: 108.1 ALTERNATIVE: 69.9 REGION: 15 ' PRO►9ATY TAX S I N U L A T I ON METRO CITIES EXCL WLUST P. ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAW VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NOMMESTEAD PARCEL REPORT: NON -AG NORESTEADS wp.aso...a....aaaa.a.a.sa...aa..asa.as. TAXES BEFORE PROPERTY TAX REFUND ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCN DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 871 --...---•NOIE 0 1 (1/3 BELOW AVG VALUE) ......... HOME / 2 (AVERAGE VALUE) ...................... NOME 0 3 (1/3 ABOVE AVG'VALUE) NOTE A 4 (COMPARATIVE VALUE) BASE ALT PCT BASE ALT PCT ........................ BASE ALT PCT ................. BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ................ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ MARKET VALUE 52700. 52700. 0 78700. 78700. 0 104". 104600. 0 60400. 60400. 0 GROSS TAX 1026. 558. -45.5 1680. 1124. -33.1 24" . 1948. -20.9 1175. 640. -45.5 HOMESTEAD CREDT -554. 0 -700. 0 -TOO. 0 -635. 0 TACONITE CREDIT 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NET TAX 472. 558. 18.4 980. 1124. 14.8 17". 1943. 10.4 541. 640. 13.4 EFFECTIVE RATE .90 1.06 1.24 1.43 1.69 1.86 .90 1.06 REGION: 17 ' ►R0PIATY TAX S 1 M U L A T 1 ON MINNEAPOL1S&ST PAUL ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY _ VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PROPERTY CLASS .............. AG NS AG NON•HS TIMBERLANDS SEAS•REC.RES'AL RESIDENTIAL NS RES NON•HS APARTMENT$ SUBSIDIZED APT$ COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL UTILITY i PERS ENTERPRISE ZONE VACANT LAND RAILROAD MINERAL DISABLED NMSTD TOTAL MARKET VALUE aa�aaaaaaaaassasaaasasaaaaaaaaaa BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANCE ............ AMOUNT PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. ...... 0 000'S) ..... ...... (100015) ..... ...... ..... 0 000'S) 0 0 0 0 0 0 1683. .0 1683. .0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8926089. 49.3 8926009. 49.3 0 0 1635401. 9.0 1635401. 9.0 0 0 1678003. 9.3 167800). 9.3 0 0 305692. 1.7 305692. 1.7 0 0 3967845. 21.9 396784S. 21.9 0 0 1066321. 5.9 1066321. 5.9 0 0 379024. 2.1 379024. 2.1 0 0 8". .0 5". .0 0 0 60947. .3 60947. .3 0 0 38530. .2 38530. .2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32995. .2 329". .2 0 0 16093373. 100.0 18093373. 100.0 0 0 ASSESSED VALUE ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 ' SIMULATION: 87J iaiiiiiiiaaiiaaaii!!ii!lialaalaia2iaa:a7if iaiilaa BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE ............ ............ ............ AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. AMOUNT PCT. ...... ..... ...... ..... ..... 0 000'S) 0 000'S) (1000'S) 0' 0 0 0 0 0 303. .0 684. .0 381. 125.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1722071. 33.7 2246719. 26.2 524648. 30.5 457912. 9.0 961241. 11.5 523329. 114.3 556525. 10.9 1006802. 11.8 450277. 80.9 67524. 1.3 183415. 2.1 115891. 171.6 1665775. 32.6 2973122. 34.8 1309347. 78.6 ""U. 8.8 799740. 9.3 351278. 78.3 152068. 3.0 284268. 3.3 132200. 86.9 169. .0 633. .0 4". 274.6 24379. .5 45711. .5 21332. 87.5 16568. .3 28897. .3 12329. 74.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1650. .0 65". .1 4949. 299.9 5113407. 100.0 $559630. 100.0 3446423. 67.4 LEVIES (100019) aaaaaaaaaaason. aaaaafaialaaaalaaaia TAX COUNTY CITY/TOWN SCHOOL SPECIAL TOTAL .......... INCREMENT ......... BASELINE: .......... 120630. .......... 1503". .......... .......... 210420. 24402. 505796. 53443. ALTERNATIVE: 121094. 249455. 210420. 24522. 605491. 67481. CHANGE: .......... 4" . .......... 99111. .......... .......... 0 120. .......... 99695. ......... 14038. PCT. CHANGE: .4 65.9 0 .5 19.7 26.3 ASSESSED VALUES 0 000'S) asasuaaz•zlaaalaslaaaassalaassla FISCAL DISPARITIES TAX...................... INCREMENT CONTRIBUTN DISTRIBUTM .......... .......... .......... 449456. 453898. 461532. 786548. 810533. 461532. .......... .......... .......... 337092. 356635. 0 75.0 78.6 0 REGICCI: 1T ' 1A0/ER TT TAX S I N U L A T 1 0 N MINNEAPOLIS&ST PAUL ' BASELINE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VS. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED PAYABLE 1987: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' PROPERTY TAX MODEL ' MOUSE RESEARCH DEPT ' 87/02/11 13.1a.07 ' SI ULATIO14: 871 GROSS TAX BURDEN NET TAX RMEN EFFECTIVE a�asaaaafaaassa■muosaaasiaaaauu:sassu sawssasaaassusassssssauaaaaa■aaussauaassau TAX RATE BASELINE ............ ALTERNATIVE ............ CHANGE ............ BASELINE ALTERNATIVE CHANGE ssassa:aa BASE ALT. PROPERTY CLASS .............. AMOLRIT ...... PCT. ..... AM"T ...... PCT. ..... AMOLRIT ...... PCT. ............ AMOLRIT PCT. ............ AMOLRIT PCT. ............ AMOUNT PCT. .... .._. PCT. PCT. 0 000'S) (100015) (1000'S) ..... ...... (100013) ..... ...... (100013) ..... ...... 0 000'S) ..... .... .... AG HS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AG NON-NS 37. .0 62. .0 25. 67.6 28. .0 43. .0 15. 53.6 1.66 2.55 TIMBERLANDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SEAS-REC-RES'AL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RESIDENTIAL NS 207M . 34.2 196559. 27.2 -11166. -5.4 120689. 23.2 1396". 26.0 19115. 15.8 1.35 1.57 RES NON -Ns 54684. 9.0 84710. 11.7 30026. 54.9 54684. 10.5 60"1. 11.3 5957. 10.9 3.34 3.71 APARTMENTS 66808. 11.0 87526. 12.1 20718. 31.0 66808. 12.8 63872. 11.9 -2936. -4.4 3.96 3.81 SUBSIDIZED AM 8059. 1.3 15825. 2.2 7766. 96.4 8059. 1.5 11332. 2.1 3273. 40.6 2.64 3.71 COMMERCIAL 194879. 32.0 241272. 33.4 46393. 23.8 194855. 37.4 184791. 34.4 -10064. -5.2 4.91 4.66 INDUSTRIAL 52796. 8.7 65466. 9.1 12668. 24.0 52792. 10.1 46949. 8.7 -5843. -11.1 4.95 4.40 UTILITY i PER$ 17973. 3.0 Z%n. 3.2 5447. 30.3 17971. 3.4 23419. 4.4 5448. 30.3 4.74 6.18 ENTERPRISE ZONE 20. .0 50. .0 30. 150.0 20. .0 36. .0 16. 80.0 2.37 4.27 VACANT LAND 2888. .5 3829. .5 941. 32.6 2888. .6 3829. .7 941. 32.6 4.74 6.28 RAILROAD 2009. .3 2550. .4 541. 26.9 2009. .4 1806. .3 -203. -10.1 5.21 4.69 MI%ERAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01&M�ED INISTO 199. ...... .0 ..... 577. ...... .1 ..... 378. ---- Ia9.9 ----- 99. .0 410. .1 311. 314.1 .30 1.24 TO. 608078. 100.0 721848. 100.0 113770. 13.7 ------ 520902. ..... 100.0 ...... 536933. ..... 100.0 ...... 16031. ..... 3.1 .... ..-- 2.68 2.97 TAX CREDITS 0 000'S) 000aass■sa ■uauaa.0 ■ss■uaauuaasss. s ss s. u. as. ■ sa susaasasusustaasssss:ss a a:s■.s.s■asas ■■ HOMESTEAD TACONITE HOMESTEAD ............................ ............................ MISC. AG ........ NON -AG ........ ........ TOTAL AG ........ NON -AG TOTAL AG CREDT MISC. AG BUSINESS TOTAL BASELINE: 0 87136. 87136. 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ 0 ........ 9. 0 ........ ........ 31. 87176. ALTERNATIVE: ............ ........ 0 0 ........ 0 0 0 0 0 1848a4. 31. 184915. CHANGE: 0 ........ -87136. -87136. ........ 0 ........ 0 ........ ........ 0 ........ -9. 184M . ........ ........ 0 97739. PCT. CHANGE: 0 -100.0 -100.0 0 0 0 -100.0 0 0 112.1 TOTAL MILL RATE u:■.■.■:.sass■ BASELINE: 120.1 ALTERNATIVE: 87.0 PROPERTY TAX MODEL REGION: 17 P R 0► E R T Y T A X S I M U L A T I O N ' HOUSE RESEARCH DEPT NINNEANXISiST ►AUL ' ' 87/02/11 13.18.07 SIMULATION: 87.1 BASELINE: ESTIMATED ►AYABLE 1987: CURRENT LAY VB. ALTERNATIVE: ESTIMATED ►AYABLE 1967: GOVERNOR'S PROPOSAL (TRIAL 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . HOMESTEAD PARCEL REPORT: NON•AG HOMESTEADS assuaa �saamswssu awsawaoq HONK; / 1 (1/3 BELOW AVG VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT PCT ►ROPOSAL ►ROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ ........ MARKET VALUE 43200. 43200. 0 GROSS TAX 934. $37. -42.5 HOMESTEAD CREDT -SON. 0 TACONITE CREDIT 0 0 NET TAX 430. 5". 24.9 EFFECTIVE RATE .99 1.24 15.16.15.UCLP, CA, N904C4E, 2.880 US.R2 TAXES BEFORE PROPERTY TAX REFUND ................................ HOME / 2 (AVERAGE VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ ........ HOME 8 3 (1/3 ABOVE AVG VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT ►CT PROPOSAL PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ ........ 64600. 64600. 0 85900. 85900. 0 1397. ON. •42.5 2109. 1587. •24.8 -700. 0 .700. 0 0 0 0 0 697. W3. 13.2 1409. 1587. 12.6 1.06 1.24 1." 1.85 HOME / 4 (COMPARATIVE VALUE) .......................... BASE ALT PCT PROPOSAL ........ PROPOSAL CHANGE ........ ........ 60400. 60400. 0 1306. 790. •42.5 -700. 0 0 0 6". 750. 23.8 1.00 1.24 5° 0 ,$ c EE 3 Ec m 3 c u3• m e d 0 v "j• '00 y c m °^� y Y 3 3 c m ►R C c o m r 3 A o. m 'o-00 o m rt C. 10 m A d m a cn �° o m o 'd {y o; o m o £, o� 3 m O T m Q •r. m 3 5 ao n m a "ri a m m •+ 0 s mam o» m !; S-1 ° C ad c a s u" S 3 cN m o m 3 o 0 3 m o o ° m rn 3 3 s �+ cnd » ° o p s f o o a > >e m e C3 o T` F o f0 A d �0 °c m 3 T o a° A o � c " v �% n m �, v N 3 a" 3 b ,n `C 10 A -� 3 p ^� �+ T 7 N O :l �• ,c tG ° D v a .�. m o •'t m M0 u'o O G '�° p c w G c O.'-v C f0 um^ C a- CL _ m OP mdO�a�N Q GQ °-3 3 v v yo e. (A m m m" °v o ; b m o v o, o o •y ate» c m o m a'• z o o CL a -1 c a a ` . CL A�1 O y Q O 0 O o x d a 0 .n n o 7 3 " N m 0° n. s m A G' 2 °om 0. °3 m d° a0?3:9-ra-. - N O 10 OAOrn C�z zm.4 �r3 m0oo ice. 3 cis m <Zz rm r- r- cn ::� 0 O m T W >> 0 m> d' m (� w ? c, a H m 3voa9 �• ° 5� _ Tp 3 c .�0 o. o M brt o » m d o-M a W d N Ea rho+• oN a sv M- m •+ l I FW an o �h0'i/, cr c m = m ° •y a. o 0- w M 0 m m o- 7 a 3 m b N vai s ~• = GQ f0 o d d F o a A � K�. ° S m In £ I V CL 0 m : w [� d < yy �• °' ° m c_ mo O a. a m •� S° m o o° a m > > ° w ° y o m :r < O n E y° S m M,.• r� c o tan f0 d n rg. 1•'f N. � o- E ° R o (� ►'I Sv � �3wm = � Q• w m ° o o d C EF° m N F.O. 3 ° R o '�° �' m w � '+• c a o ?. o T3 ! D d 3 0 f0 N m o w' 5, R. o •V % m d .� m m y n 0 m^ o 0 W' .°.. Q N o 7 -0 O< E Cl G Q O m m a ,F' E a a c 70m y o m mO cr La m c 3 T rL d a m a A O C 3 d y m A 3 Eo 0 �3 M v m :' M �Ta.M a.T _ � > > v n. n• 0 a � m 3 o E o E cq �+ S o m (!) l c o a c o 0.0 3 0 f/�C f0 N a 0 m c m" C•� o o 0 0 3 N �c R1 d N o o n o 0C M 0 0 n n• T o- o �.% ? pQ Om�a O� aaNUM �' C^ nnnpYiTi O .p UO n A ON .0 o� i �o� gZd ;� EY gU ESN O gm i on°o ¢ n zc5i > > 3 3 3c7c�i�zc5°u a `o w s O « CN Z O� G•N O �9 Y 7� N ..S Z V� 24 e.Ni i-° "Urn gA In. N �g Y p {eJ 9y � ey ypp Y V AA y C B��Npp yCQ Ogjp �d0 .-_ �+LB sf�O� L�np N LM`gON+� ipNOpM .i O t+1 U 7� N fp�p •.'n •.q aC id Y' 9M� O� .7 iOUN iN~ Hr.N 9 �OQN i �On1N L } �DOZ�aPQq 'L OOp� .0 Np� d O �pN y�y aO�z��p � p�O. OF --6i 3' o OnN] �i^�N Yi �t+gf Y NUCO �m Oa0 } m qh 5 Y O o"�" ° O Y°.°�a $c'v aa vF ii gg �i Y 4 O iO ;° 4N Y O :g' CO o$ o �O,S.�,• °^• �� uay ° ° rii_ a3_ �� tC9am_ �(�c: c7_ sk GiN.�_ z dc7 `. Z_ Zc7ar-`O ZUU' aU_" Zc7ax°` Z°t7aiC OC9i d' � �i Yy N e " m Y ,qi W � S=�amN ��y�an.-?a_ �O' 0 yT7-6Zn bI. fiU^ �'pa 5•ip7~�Pp 9a�nO U�__a o_O1O; 6c,N "aijbl09Y�p^NOo �31�g;�(QOp �CjS[,��fVfRphh .s•�aiU��SQQQ�i �`°y% �Nc�0NNp Ny!.�7■ ��°B �Ot O C O C N C C A y' c E , b ro-c C Yl d O) ._01 in U 7 C m 0d a '0 o d d c-uc; � c 3 o J c E c d •� O o U 7 d Y C 'D '0 d 0 N O C N Ni 0 d a o 0> T 0) +r •.. E o=o a o > N .5 L o o k yr E �r N > o c c m > cn s y °o 'D O O'1 O C E 7 O O E° 0` 3 ,C d o Ri V M c a d vv o. f E rn D E e ° L' a x o °� 3o 3�no x =EYo W E m d ¢� N .Cn = N u 3 d a E > c E N d E O c s = d � u .0 O A C • � o c p ° a O � C E = :O C O 0 G q U ++ x o `o Q -H � Q a Ln A l`� .n= 'L a ti r is _ ,1 x J D I h Snack trays on the honor system. The Munch Box snack tray is serviced at your premises, with no obligation or risk to you. The tray provides your employees with a wide variety of snack foods on a pay as you take basis. The Munch Box will custom pack a tray to the selection you desire, or furnish a standard packed tray. Your honesty is needed to make this service possible. '�`tt -Top Quality, Fresh, Brand Name Snacks P' �Q,''C • -Regular, Dependable Delivery Service -Your Choice of Snack Items -Large Variety -Lo-Cal Health Snacks Thank you for the opPortunt� -b serve yvu t Any questions or Comments Call (612) 560-6888 Roll Candy (Life Savers) Regular Sugar Free Gum Candy Regular Sugar Free Snickers Milky Way Mars M 6 M Plain M B M Peanut 'Reeses's PB Cups Twix 'Skor Hot Tamales 'Hershey Bars 'Rolo Pearsons Nut Roll Baby Ruth Butterfinger `Almond Joy/Mounds 'Kit Kat Cherry Nibs The Munch Box Selection Sheet You May Select the Items in Your Snack Tray Nuts & Etc. Almonds Beef Sticks/Jerky P-Nuttles Lo-Cal Health Snacks Peanuts Corn Nuts Cookies E Crackers Oreo Cookies Vanilla Creme Granola (Chewy or Hard) Lorna Doone Cheese N' Peanut Butter Sandwich Cheese on Wheat Crackers Kraft Cheese ✓; Crackers Brownies Fig Newtons Choc. Covered Peanut Butter Wafers NOTES: The selection sheet should total 80 items. Ten items will be added to the tray for a total count of 90. `Substituting with non -melting items may be done during the warmest summer months. Big Cookies 6 Chips (l 2 items only) Big Cookies Plain Potato Chips Sour Cream r; Onion Barbeque Corn Chips Nachos Cheese Curls Popcorn Cheese Popcorn Cracker Snacks of _ Maureen Andrews7-110111111111 Admr.—Clerk—Treas . C City Hall ALBERTVILLE, MN 55301 League of Minnesota Cities CITIES BULLETIN JOHNSC) FIRST CLASS U.S. POSTAGE PAID St. Paul, MN PERMIT NO. 3223 An update of legislative and congressional actions affecting cities Feb. 21-27, 1987 Number 8 Including reviews of metropolitan area issues by the Association of Metropolitan Municipalities League of Minnesota Cities, 183 University Avenue East, St. Paul, MN 55101, (612) 227-5600 Highlights LMC Cities Bulletins No.-` Feb. 23-27, 19 7 ***ACTION ALERT*** Cities should ask legislators to oppose sales tax for cities : .......................................... W-1 City officials should contact their legislators urging them to oppose the governor's recommendation for sales tax and motor vehicle excise tax on cities. Election bills get committee approval ..........................W-1 National League of Cities requests information on Medicare costs to cities.......................................F-1 Summaries of bills Note: The League summaries bills of interest to city officials. Courts....................................................S-1 Elections................................................S-1 Environment...............................................S-3 Finance and revenu-e................................. .....S-3 Gambling.................................................S-4 General Government........................................S-4 Liquor....................................................S-7 Pensions and retirement...................................S-7 Special legislation.......................................S-7 Transportation............................................S-8 W=Week in review S=Summaries of bills F=Federal update W-1 Week in review Action Alert CITIES SHOULD ASK LEGISLATORS TO OPPOSE SALES TAX FOR CITIES City officials should contact their state Legislators urging them to oppose the governor's recommendation to force cities to pay the six percent sales and motor vehicle excise tax on their purchases. Each city should provide legislators with an estimate of how much this proposal would cost their city and their property taxpayers. The state expects the sales tax plan to raise $29.2 million in taxes from city governments over the next two years. The motor vehicle excise proposal would raise an estimated $3.8 million from cities over the same period. This represents a total cost increase for cities of at least $33 million. Assuming that cities would need to increase property taxes to pay for this sales tax, then, on average, property taxes would increase by three percent. The League believes that these estimates may understate the costs of the proposal. We are currently conducting a survey of the state's cities to gain more reliable estimates. The League is opposing the governor's recommendation on the sales and motor vehicle excise taxes. In recent testimony, we have argued that this cost increase would come at a time when cities are being forced to raise their property taxes in order to cope with very large declines in federal and state aid. The proposal makes little sense. It amounts to one level of government taxing another. Only six other states impose a sales tax on all local government purchases. (This proposal has now been introduced in both houses: H.F. 525 and S.F 547. See bill summaries page 8.) ELECTIONS BILLS GET COMMITTEE APPROVAL The House Elections Subcommittee heard H.F. 334 the election procedures bill. (See summaries, page 2, for additional information). The subcommittee added two amendments and sent the bill on to the full committee. The first amendment dealt with .-Q preparations for special elections, and the second amendment would permit the county auditor to substitute optical scan ballots for paper ballots in precincts that use an optical scan voting system. w-2 The full Committee on General Legislation, Veterans Affairs and Gaming met on Thursday, February 26 and recommended passage of the bill after passing a delete everything amendment. The Cities Bulletin will review that the amended bill next week. Both the subcommittee and the full committee recommended passage of H.F. 281 this week. The biLL deals with experimental mail elections. By a narrow margin the Elections Subcommittee recommended passage of H.F. 312 which would repeal the authority of women to use Mrs. and spouse's name when filing for an election. The full committee heard the bill on February 26, and Laid it over. F-1 Federal update NLC_requests information on Medicare costs to cities The National League of Cities is urgently requesting the following information from cities: 1. List of numbers of current employees not now covered by Medicare; 2. Estimated cost to comply with mandatory Medicare coverage for all city employees; 3. Percentage of current employees not now covered by Medicare who will become eligible for or receive Medicare benefits when they retire; 4. Name of a contact in the city who is familiar with Medicare coverage requirements (in case NLC requires additional information). In compiling these figures, remember that employees who are currently covered by PERA/Social Security are already covered by Medicare since a percentage of the Social Security contribution is for Medicare. Do not include those employees in the calculation of increased costs. Please send the information to: Director of Federal Relations National League of Cities 1301 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W. Washington, D.C. 20004 Please send a copy of the information to Ann Higgins, LMC Federal Liaison, at the League office in St. Paul S-1 Summaries of bills COURTS Administrative statute of limitations. S.F. 446 (Jude, Wegscheid, Cohen, R. Peterson, Laidig Judiciary) would extend the statute of limitations on commencement of actions to both judicial and administrative actions. DWI --mandatory Jail sentences . S.F. 509 (Ramstad, Knaak, Jude, Olson) (Judiciary would require an individual to surrender his/her license plates if the person is convicted of driving a motor vehicle ifter the revocation, cancellation, or suspension of the person's _ vers license for DWI. The individual would be able to apply for a special set of License plates easily identifiable by Law enforcement officers. An individual would not be able to reinstate his/her driver's license until successfulL completion of alcohol treatment if recommended by an alcohol assessment. The proposal would require an alcohol assessment when a person under 18 years of age is convicted of a DWI offense. A person convicted of DWI would need to serve a minimum jail sentence of: 1) 90 days - first offense; 2) 180 days - second offense within five years; and 3) one year - third offense within five years. RERCTMNS Voting s stems in first class cities. S.F. 466 (Kroenig, Waldorf, Solon) (Elections and Ethics) would require cities of the first class to use a new system in no more than 15 percent of the city's precincts for the first election after changing to a new voting system. The city must compare the new system with old system for reliability, dependability, and frequency of error. First class cities could not change voting systems without passing a resolution and conducting at least three public hearings at different locations within the city. Centralized_ voter re istration system. S.F. 487 (Luther, R. Moe, Pogemiller, Hughes, Cohen) (Elections and Ethics) Companion H.F. 523 (Ogren, Norton, Scheid, Osthoff) would require the secretary of state to develop a statewide computerized voter registration system that would provide a central data base and would link together the county voter registration systems. The bill would allow the state to send out voter registration cards with income tax forms and on driver's licence applications. Under the bill, state agencies would need to provide voter registration services for employees and the public. The bill would appropriate funds to the secretary of state and commissioners of public safety and revenue. Experimental mail elections. H.F. `''1 (Steensma, Kostohyrz, Scheid, DiLLe, DeBlieck) (General L .islation, Veterans Affairs and Gaming) would propose a new law per:_ tting the secretary of state to authorize experimental local main special elections between S-2 August 1, 1987 and March 30, 1989 on up to two ballot questions. The bill would require six weeks notice prior to a mail election and would require the secretary of state to report to Legislature. R2pea13_authorit to use "Mrs." and spouse's name on election filings. H.F. 312 Scheid, Minne, Kostohryz, Segal, Morrison) General Legislation, Veterans Affairs and Gaming) Companion S.F. 438 (Samuelson, D. Peterson, Berglin, Benson, Laidig) (Elections and Ethics) would repeal authority for married women and unmarried widows to file for election using the title "Mrs." and their husbands' names or initials. Election procedures. H.F. 334 (Orenstein, Kostohyrz, Sheid, KLudt, TviggumT GeneraL Legislation Veterans Affairs and Gaming) would require people examining voter registration files or absentee ballot materials to sign and certify that the information obtained will only be used for permitted purposes. Under the bill, absentee ballot applicants could only get one set of ballots. The bill would revoke a candidate's filing fee if the check is dishonored, and would assess costs for removing names from the ballot. The bill would Limit the delegation of training duties to full-time municipal election officials; would provide for secured retention of voted ballots; modify precinct summary statements; allow certain designees to serve on canvaasing boards; limit printers bond; modify procedures for name alteration on ballots; and would make other procedural and tehnicaL changes. Companion bill S.F. 416 (Hughes, D. Peterson, Morse, Samuelson, D.E. Johnson) (Elections and Ethics). Presidental primary. H.F. 346 (Wenzel, Krueger, Uphus, McEachern, BegiehY_General Legislation, Veterans Affairs and Gaming) would provide for a presidential primary to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in March of each presidential election year. The bill would also provide for determination of names on the ballots and the conduct of the election. School board and city election requirements. S.F. 248 (D. Peterson) Secretary of State's Housekeeping Bill) (Senate Elections and Ethics) would require city and school board candidates to file for primaries before November elections no earlier than 70 days and no later than 56 days before the first Tuesday after the second Monday in September. Absent a primary, filings would need to occur no more than 15 days and no Less than one day before the same date in September. Cities would need to adopt ordinances or resolutions for primary elections three months (now six weeks) before the next municipal general election, and the primary would need to be at Least six weeks before the general election. The bill would require that absentee ballots be avaiLabLe for school district elections which are held on the same day as a statewide election. The bill would also require soil and water conservation district secretaries to immediately submit the names and terms of supervisor candidates to the county auditor. S-3 Local ward and precinct boundary_changes. S.F. 397 (D. Peterson, -- Luther, Laidig) (Elections and Ethics' would limit city ward reapportionment, requiring reapportionment and precinct boundary establishment within 45 days after Legislative reapportionment or by May 10 in a year ending in two, whichever is first; limit other Local government district reapportionment, requiring reapportionment within 65 days after Legislative reapportionment or by June 1 in a year ending in two whichever is first. ENVIRONMENT Pesticide regulation . H.F. 485 (Kalis, Munger, Redalen, Rose) M_Vir'ronment & Natural Resources) would authorize the commissioner of agriculture to regulate the registration, labeling, distribution, sale, storage, handling, transportation, use, application, and disposal of pesticides and would pre-empt any local government ordinance, law, or rule that regulates pesticides. Lake improvement district meetings. H.F. 521 (Jennings, R, Anderson, R. Johnson, Munger, Battaglia) (Environment & Natural Resources) would require a two -week published notice of a Lake improvement district's annual meeting. *PCA--fee_ authority. S.F. 472 (WaLdorf, Merriam, Lessard, Taylor, StumpfT(Environment & Natural Resources) would repeal the PCA's authority to impose permit fees and hazardous waste administration fees. Transportation of hazardous waste. S.F. 508 (Novak, Marty, Merriam, Frederick, Purfeerst )(Transportation) would require a person who transports hazardous waste in Minnesota to be licensed and would set up procedures for the enforcement of this requirement. FINANCE AND REVENUE Increased tax on cigarettes and tobacco_ products. H.F. 504 Solberg, Munger, Clark, D. Carlson Taxes , effective July 1, 1987, would increase the tax rate on cigarettes weighing less than three pounds per 1,000 to 22 mills (now 19.5 mills) and to 42.3 mills (now 39.8 mills) on cigarettes weighing more than three pounds per 1,000. One mill of this increase would go to the creation of a statewide mental health account, one-half a mill would go to the creation of a state board of arts account, and the remainder to the general fund. The tax on tobacco products would increase to 30 percent (now 25 percent) and the new receipts would also help fund these new programs. In addition, a floor stocks tax would be applied to distributors of cigarettes and Little cigars--2.5 mills, and on distributors of other tobacco products --five percent of the wholesale price of each product. The bill would impose a tax of one percent per month on these taxes S-4 when delinquent. The bill would also require reports to the commissioner of revenue showing the products on hand and the tax due on each. Expansion of 1a property classification. S.F. 471 (Lantry) (Taxes and Tax Laws would expand the eligibility of disabled property owners to qualify for 1a property classification effective for 1987 assessments and for subsequent years. The bill would change the requirements to: 80 percent (replacing 90 percent) or more of total income from SSI, worker's compensation, social security disability, or retirement disability; and a total income cap of $25,000 from all sources. (Companion biLL H.F. 484, Kelly, Taxes) BroadeninE_of_sales tax. H.F. 525 (Voss) (Taxes) extends the six percent sales tax to local governments, state agencies, and non-profit organization sales. Repeals transfer of sales tax receipts to the highway user tax distribution fund and the transit assistance fund. Eliminates federal excise taxes from sales prices. Imposes the sales tax on the fees charged for the 911 emergency telephone system, interstate telephone calls, meals provided to employees at Less than market value, railroad rolling stock, aircraft sales, and Licensed watercraft sales. The League strongly opposes this proposal to extend the sales tax to the puchases of local governments. See Action Alert. GAMBLING ALLowab.Le expenses__insurance. H.F. 500 (Riveness, Kostohryz, Reding,+Quinn, Olsen T_TGeneral Legislation, Veterans Affairs & Gaining) would allow up to 50 percent of the annual premium on a liability insurance policy procured by the organization to be treated as an allowable expense for the use of Lawful gambling profits. Pay�ment of a percen_ta�e of _tax to Local governmental unit. S.F. I467—TPogemiller, Lantry, McQuaid, Bertram) General Legislation & Public Gaming) would require the charitable gambling board to pay five percent of the charitable gambling tax to the city, town, or county where the licensed organization is Located. The local unit would need to use the proceeds for expenses it incurs in the enforcement of the charitable gambling Law. GENERAL GOVERNMENT Omnibus insurance biLL. H.F. 392 (Skoglund, Carruthers, G. Anderson, Rodosovich, Simoneau) (Financial Institutions & Insurance) would not allow an insurer who provides group life or health benefits to change benefits, Limit coverage, or otherwise restrict participation until it notifies the group and each enrollee of such change. The biLL would require individual worker's compensation self -insurers to have a certain Level of reserves or S-5 surety bonds to ensure adequate protection for employees of the self -insurer. Under the proposal, companies that issue commercial liability and/or property insurance could not cancel a policy during the term of the policy except for: 1) non-payment of premium; 2) misrepresentation or fraud in obtaining the policy; 3) actions by tae insured that have substantially increased or changed the risk insured; 4) refusal of the insured to eliminate known conditions that increase the potential for loss after notification by the insurer that the condition must be removed; 5) substantial change in the risk assumed that was not foreseen; 6) loss of reinsurance; 7) continuation of the policy would violate the insurance laws; or 8) non-payment of dues to an association or organization. The bill would require a 60-day notice before a insurer could cancel a policy. An insurer would also need to give a 60-day notice of the intent not to renew an insurance policy. A violation of any of these regulations would be actionable as an unfair trade practice. The definition of a covered claim under the assigned risk plan would include a claim that would have been paid by an insurer under a claims -:Wade policy if insolvency had not prevented such payment. Every group insurance policy issued or renewed after August 1, 1987, providing coverage for life insurance benefits to a Minnesota resident employed in the state would need to contain a provision ^ that would permit the insured to continue coverage after becoming separated from the employer until the insured is re-employed and receives similar benefits or 18 months have passed. The former employee would be responsible for up to 102 percent of the cost of such coverage payable to the former employer. The employer would need to inform the employee of the right to elect continued coverage, the cost to continue coverage, the manner of payment, and time by which payment would be due to retain coverage. If the employer fails to notify the employee the employer would remain liable for the employee's coverage. The bill would require the insurer to make available an individual policy providing the same or substantially similar benefits. Under the bill, health insurance or health maintenance insurers would need to include maternity benefits in the same manner as any other illness covered under the policy or contract. The proposal would require automobile insurers to specifically request information regarding moving violations or motor vehicle accidents on an application for insurance if they use such incidents to exercise their rights to cancel within the first 59 days of coverage. Owners and operators of motorized golf carts or four-wheel, aLL- terrain vehicles who cannot obtain insurance in the private market ::ouLd purcha3e coverage under the Minnesota Automobile Assigned Risk Plan. S-6 Volunteer coaches, managers, or officials for non-profit sports r organizations would be immune from liability for injuries suffered by a player or participant as the result of the person's acts or omissions, unless: 1) the person is covered by insurance; 2) the person acts in a willful and wanton or reckless manner; 3) the acts or omissions arise out of the use of a motor vehicle; 4) the person allows a sports competition or practice to be conducted without adequate supervision; and 5) the person provides services or assistance as part of a public or private educational institution's athletic program. *Cancer surveillance s sy tem. H.F. 503 (Olson, Stanius, D. Carlson, Boo, Ozment) wealth & Human Services) would establish a state cancer surveillance system. Data privacy--admin_istrationi cl ssificationL collection. H.F. 534 (R. Nelson, Kelly, WeLLe, Carruthers, Dempsey] -Judiciary) would not allow the administrator of the data to assess a charge or require the payment of a fee before a person could inspect public data and would classify data as summarized in H.F. 568 (see below). Data privacy --dissemination of data. H.F. 561 (D. Nelson, Kelly, DempseyTTJudieiaryT wouLd authorize the dissemination of data on an individual who has significant mental illness or emotional impairment to the protection and advocacy system in order to protect the individual's rights. Dataprivacy--classification of data. H.F. 568 (Jefferson, Clark, DeBlieck, Cooperr Judieiarry)would classify as protected non-public data: nursing home appraisal data during the rate -setting process and St. Paul port authority data not on individuals. Farm assistance data, PERA data on beneficiaries and survivors, department of public service data on complaints by tenants, certain hazardous substance injury compensation board data after a decision has been made, and private financial incentive data would be private data. Data privacy --release of traffic accident information. S.F. 447 (57.R. Frederickson, Frank, Renneke, Jude, Schmitz) ((judiciary) would allow Law enforcement agencies to release the date of birth of individuals involved in traffic accidents. ReguLation of,,non- overnm_�oint self __entaLem ployee -insurance em oyee health plans. S.F.-9 Solon �CommerceT would require non-resident employers who belong to a joint self-insurance pool covering employees in Minnesota to comply with Minnesota law and would modify excess stop -loss coverage of employee health plans. Data_privaaa weLfare data. S.F. 503 (R. Peterson, Wegscheid, Cohen, Marty, Laidig] TJudiciary) would authorize the disclosure of welfare data to Law enforcement or probation personnel to the extent needed in an investigation. S-7 LIQUOR Regulation of beer kegs. H.F. 538 (Murphy, Begich) (Regulated Industries would require every keg of beer sold with a capacity of seven or more gallons to have a permanently attached registration number engraved by the manufacturer and would require the off -sale retailer to record: 1) the date and time of purchase; 2) the name and address of the purchaser; and 3) the registration number of the keg. The retailer would need to keep the records for at least 90 days after the date of sale. Liquor taxation. H.F. 559 (Jacobs, Uphus, Bertram) (Taxes) would reduce the sales tax on beer and liquor as follows: for sales before June 1, 1989--8.5 percent; for sales after May 31, 1989, and before June 1, 1990--8.0 percent; for sales after May 31, 1990, and before June 1, 1991--7.5 percent; for sales after May 31, 1991 and before June 1, 1992--7.0 percent; and for sales after May 31, 1992 and before June 1, 1993--6.5 percent. PENSIONS AND RETIREMENT Employer option rule of 85. H.F. 497 (R. Johnson, Sarna, C. Nelson, Simoneau) (Governmental Operations) would give an employer the option to use the rule of 85 for its employees and would require the employer who elects to use the option to pay the increased costs caused by the early retirement of its employee. SPECIAL LEGISLATION Minnea oLis/St. Paul --urban revitalization action program. H.F. 475(O'Connor, Clark, McLaughlin, Pappas, Norton) and H.F. 476 (Clark, Pappas, Jefferson) (Economic Development & Housing) would establish a program in Minneapolis and St. Paul to revitalize distressed neighborhoods. The bill includes a request for a state appropriation. Under the original proposal each city was asking to receive $10 million. Nashwauk--annexation . H.F. 489 (Solberg) (Local & Urban) would grant the Municipal Board authority to take jurisdiction in an annexation proceeding between the city of Nashwauk and the town of Nashwauk for non -abutting property. Washington count: -capital improvement bonds. H.F. 491 (Price, Beard, Swenson (Local & Urban) would authorize the Washington County Board to issue general obligation capital improvement bonds without an election. Hennepin County --capital improvement bonds . H.F. 531 (Rice, Battaglia, Scheid, Forsythe, Riveness LocaL & Urban) would authorize Hennepin county to issue capital improvement bonds witriout an election and to levy an annual tax for debt retirement. 9-1 Duluth --capital equipment bonds_. S.F. 479 (Solon, Gustafson) Local & UrbanTwould authorize the city of Duluth to issue general obligation bonds, without an election, to provide for the purchase of capital equipment. Duluth --design advisory! committee S.F. 480 (Gustafson, Solon) TLoca1 & Urban would authorize the city of Duluth to establish design districts to preserve and enhance the environmental quality of the city of Duluth. Duluth airport authority --civil service S.F. 494 (Gustafson, SoLon Governmental OperationsTwouLd make employees hired by the Duluth airport authority after June 20, 1969 not covered by any civil service system. Hermantown--economic development S.F. 533 (Gustafson, Solon) Economic Development & Housing would authorize the city of Hermantown to hold property for economic development purposes tax exempt for a period Longer than authorized under current Law. TRANSPORTATION Recording of town _roads. H.F. 542 (WelLe, V. Johnson, Kalis, Tunheim, Dempsey](LocaL & Urban) would authorize towns to record town roads through the the adoption and recording of an official map and would give the town exclusive authority over recorded roads. Traffic regulations related to handicapped eople. S.F. 451 (D. Peterson, Purfeerst, Lantry, Novak, Ramstad) ((Transportation) would allow only one set of handicapped License plates or a identifying certificate for each eligible person and would require the license plates to be renewed every five years with a certificate from a physician stating that the person is physically handicapped. A vehicle displaying handicapped License plates may park the vehicle in: 1) designated parking spaces; 2) a Limited -time parking space without regard to the posted time Limit; and 3) in metered parking spaces without obligation to pay the meter fees. A person who appropriates or uses a handicapped License plate without being physically handicapped or without being accompanied by a handicapped person would be subject to a $500 fine. The bill would require the comissioner of public safety to establish a single form of identification and certification for vehicles operated or occupied by physically handicapped individuals. Regulation of motorizedbicycles. S.F. 469 (DeCramer) (Transportation) would_ define motorcycle under the Minnesota No -Fault Act and would include motorized bicycles in the definition. A person could operate a motorized bicycle with either a driver's license or a motorized bicycle permit. When within a city, a motorized bicycle would be entitled to the full use of a traffic Lane. On a highway outside a city a person would need to operate the motorized bicycle on the shoulder if paved or as near as possible to the right-hand side of the roadway. *League -supported. ORDINANCE 1983-2 AN ORDINANCE LICENSING AND REGULATING THE KEEPING OF DOGS IN THE CITY OF ALBERTVILLE AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 1975-1 WITH RESPECT THERETO sa_ticin 1. Li_anaa, jj'r d. No person shall keep any dog within the City of Albertville without securing a license therefor from the City Clerk, who shall keep a record of all licenses issued and shall issue a metal tag for each license. The license fee shall be $6.00. Replacement of lost licenses shall require another license fee to be paid. A license tag is non -transferable to any other animal or to a new owner for a dog for which it is issued. Proof of vaccinations shall be submitted in order to obtain a license. Sacti n 2. R nni nN ; t Laraa, Fr h t i ed. No dog shall be permitted to run at large within the City limits of Albertville. Section] • jfiit�• The City Dog Catcher or any person employed by the City to control dogs, and any peace officer within the City of Albertville shall impound any dog found unlicensed or running at large and shall give notice of the impounding to the owner of such dog, if known. In case the owner is unknown such officer shall post notice at the pound and at the City Hall stating that if the dog is not claimed within five regular business days of the posting of the notice, it may be disposed of in accordance with Section 5 herein. S-ection 4. Fes. The owner or harborer of dogs impounded shall be liable for a fee of $10.00 for the first impoundment, $50.00 for the second impoundment and $100.00 for each impoundment thereafter, plus the charges for boarding and keeping the dog while impounded. The charges shall be paid prior to the release of the dog. Sect Ion, A. Uix""I of ad A*+i alfae In the event that the dog is not claimed within the time prescribed in Section 3 herein, it will be deemed abandoned, and will become the property of the City, and may be disposed of in a proper and humane manner, or sold under the procedures contained in Minn. Stat. Sec. 514.93. Section A. Pahlic niaaa". No person shall harbor or keep any dog within the City of Albertville which creates a public nuisance. Upon receipt of a written complaint of such annoyance by the occupants of two or more neighboring properties, the City shall notify the owner or harborer of such dog that such nuisance must be abated within 48 hours. Failure to obey such notice and abate the nuisance is a violation of this Ordinance. Section.1. Limit, of . nga on. Any fIne Pr=yes. Not more than two dogs over six months of age shall be kept on any one premises except at a licensed commercial kennel. �Sectin_n D. Fnfnrcement Prnvednre. Any City official, and any person designated by the City to enforce this Ordinance may pick up and impound any dog found not to be kept, confined or restrained, or licensed in the manner required by this ordinance. To enforce this ordinance, such officers may enter upon private property where there is reasonable cause to believe that a dog is on the premises and is not licensed as required by this ordinance or that there is a dog on the premises which is not being kept, confined or restrained, as herein proved. Any owner shall produce for inspection his dog license receipt when requested to do so by such officer. Subd. 1. &Wn4mg, At _ Laxag. Running at large of dogs shall mean permitting any dog to go on or about the public streets, alleys or other places in the City except the premises of the owner or harborer thereof, unless the dog is on a leash or in an automobile or similar confinement and under the control of a responsible person. Subd. 2. Haxyor,et. The "harborer' of a dog shall mean any person who has the custody of any dog or permits the same to be kept or to stay on or about his premises. Subd. 3. PjthI {c. tie Ge. The definition of "public nuisance" as defined by Minn. Stat. Sec. 561.01 as "anything which is dangerous to health, or indecent or offensive to the senses, or an obstruction to the free use of property, so as to interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property", is incorporated herein. Subd. 4. "Licensed Commercial Kennel" is defined as a place where more than two dogs over six months of age are kept, and where the business of selling, boarding, breeding, showing, treating or grooming of dogs is conducted, with license from the City. RGt ice. B��el . f 1 975r1 . Ordinance No. 1975-1 is hereby repealed. -2- • Section tt. Viglattan. Violation of this Ordinance shall be punishable as a misdemeaner. Adopted by the City Council of Albertville this 18th day of April, 1983. ATTEST: City Clerk 1983. Mayor Published in the Crow River News -------------------. -3-