Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/26/1991 TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ.SPECIAL SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA NOVEMBER 26, 1991 Mayor Gary Laurent presiding 1] Roll Call at 7: 00 P.M. 2] PUBLIC HEARING - 1992 Budget a] Res. No. 3495 - Setting 1991 Tax Levy, Collectible in 1992 (page 6-60 in budget) b] Res. No. 3496 - Adopting the 1992 Budget (page 6-59 in budget) 3] Continue public hearing to Tuesday, December 10, 1991 at 7 : 00 P.M. (if necessary) 4] Other Business _ 5] Adjourn Dennis R. Kraft City Administrator Bring copy of 1992 Budget distributed earlier! November 18, 1991 Greg Voxland 129 E. First Avenue Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 re: Scott County Proposed Tax Increase for 1992 Dear Mr. Voxland: This letter is in response to the notice of proposed property tax for 1992. I am totally opposed to the proposed increase that the city, county, and school district is asking for. I feel it is high time that our government officials, whatever level they are, start taking some fiscal responsibility. The government cannot continue to raise taxes when they are short of money. You need to run the government as a business. We are in a recession, people are not getting raises, they are out of work and in my case as a property owner, I have not been able to raise my rents in the last three years. If the City of Shakopee wants affordable housing, the government has to control real estate taxes. As it is right now, it takes me three full months of rent receipts to pay the yearly taxes. I can only repeat, IT IS TIME GOVERNMENT CONTROLS THEIR SPENDING. Thank you. Aririo 46‘7,(71. R6bert L. Good Property Owner 11108 Carver Court Burnsville, Minnesota NOV 2 5 1991 M4 Y OF SHAKOP k q),S2-8-.) }1A-rk (r,-NS-0---4 { s ck-eY\A" f�- ,,. fi s vyk ) � 96,- /-2/ 6 7Tc:2-• TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: 1992 Budget Adoption And Tax Levy Resolutions DATE: November 21, 1991 Introduction and Background Resolution Number 3495 finally adopts the tax levy for payable 1992. This covers the maximum levy Council can make and still leaves the 1992 budget with a $8,899 deficit, which is a draw down of fund balance. This resolution must be adopted at the conclusion of the public hearing on November 26 (or December 10th) . Resolution Number 3496 adopts the 1992 Budget. This resolution must be adopted at the conclusion of the public hearing on November 7 (or December 10th) . The resolutions are in the back of the budget document, pages 6-59 and 6-60. A corrected version of the budget adoption resolution (number 3496) is attached. Action Offer Resolution Number 3495, A Resolution Setting the 1991 Tax Levy, Collectable In 1992, and move its adoption. Offer Resolution Number 3496, A Resolution Adopting the 1992 Budget, and move its adoption. RESOLUTION NO. 3495 A RESOLUTION SETTING 1991 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 1992 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, COUNTY OF SCOTT, MINNESOTA, that the following sums of money be levied as the tax levy in accordance with existing law for the current year, collectible in 1992, upon the taxable property in the City of Shakopee, for the following purposes: GENERAL FUND LEVY $2,409,425 SPECIAL LEVIES: Auditor's Error of Omission 21,413 TOTAL GENERAL FUND 2,430,838 DEBT SERVICE SPECIAL LEVY 1985A Improvement Bonds $ 5,545 1986A Improvement Bonds 34,380 1986B Improvement Bonds 31,072 1987A Improvement Bonds 4,386 1988A Improvement Bonds 15,043 1990A Improvement Bonds 81,292 1991A Improvement Bonds 12.457 184.175 TOTAL LEVY $2,615,013 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby instructed to transmit a certified copy to this resolution to the County Auditor of Scott County, Minnesota. Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1991. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: Approved as to form City Clerk City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 3496 A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1992 BUDGET BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA that the 1992 Budget with the estimated revenues and appropriations for the General Fund and the Special Revenue Funds as shown below is hereby adopted. Estimated Revenue Expenditures & Other Sources & Other Uses General Fund - (Personnel, Supplies & Capital Outlays) Mayor and Council $ 63,980 Administration 228,690 City Clerk 106,850 Finance 222,110 Legal 100,180 Community Development 220,100 Government Buildings 141,950 Police 1,256,840 Fire 435,520 Inspection 141,850 Engineering 228,,220 Street 659,065 Shop 69,780 Pool 112,065 Park 231,880 Recreation 187,180 Garbage 480,450 Unallocated 174,500 Total General Fund $5,052,311 $5,061,210 Park Reserve 34,000 35,000 Transit 276,450 276,450 Capital Equipment 260,000 508,000 Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of , 1991. Mayor of the City of Shakopee ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to form City Attorney TO: Dennis R. Kraft, City Administrator FROM: Tom Steininger, Chief of Police SUBJECT: Law Enforcement Television Network DATE: November 14 , 1991 INTRODUCTION: The Police Department has received a donation to pay for a subscription to the Law Enforcement Television Network. BACKGROUND: The Law Enforcement Television Network is a satellite television service based in Texas which deals in law enforcement training material . Although the service provides twenty-four a day programming, the most effective use is achieved by taping programs and establishing a video library. The Minnesota POST Board approves material preserved in this manner to be used to satisfy the continuing peace officer education requirements it has established. - Penn State University also offers law enforcement extension courses for credit and the FBI National Academy in Quantico,Virginia haF recently joined the list of LETN providers. Although no city funds will be involved, the subscription agreement might be considered by Council to be a contract which they must approve. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Consider the subscription agreement with LETN to be a contract and authorize the appropriate City Officials to execute same with the understanding that there be no cost to the City. 2 . Do not consider the subscription agreement a contract which makes approval by Council unnecessary. RECOMMENDATION: Either 1 or 2 above. ACTION REQUESTED: Either 1 or 2 above.