Laserfiche WebLink
capital improvements to the library in <br />that year. <br />b) If the MOE reduction in Minn. Stat. § <br />275.761 is restored to a level at least as <br />high as the 2010 level, it should be <br />phased in over three years. <br />c) Any relief provided to the county <br />MOE requirement should not result in <br />additional funding requirements to <br />cities. <br />The authority for library systems to <br />create library taxing districts should be <br />expanded statewide. <br />The Legislature should allow municipal <br />libraries the ability to charge non- <br />residents for membership and\or other <br />services without the loss of any State or <br />Federal aids. <br />FF-29. Equitable Funding of <br />Community Education Services <br />Issue: Under Minn. Stat. § 124D.20, school <br />districts are authorized to levy for <br />community education programs that can <br />include youth recreational activities. <br />However, state statute limits the total <br />amount of revenue that can be raised by the <br />school district to fund community education <br />programs and this limit has not been <br />sufficiently increased in recent years. In <br />many instances, cities participate in the <br />funding of these programs and with the <br />statutory limit on the amount school districts <br />can levy, the increased cost of these <br />programs is increasingly falling on cities and <br />their property taxpayers. In areas where the <br />school district is significantly larger than the <br />city, the burden of funding these programs is <br />falling disproportionately on city taxpayers <br />while the programs benefit the entire school <br />district. <br />Response: The League of Minnesota <br />Cities supports a statutory increase in the <br />community education revenue <br />authorization for school districts. <br />Increasing the amount of the community <br />service revenue available to school <br />districts would provide a steady source of <br />revenue, which would be assessed against <br />all properties in the school district, not <br />just against properties in the city <br />FF-30. Street Reconstruction Bond <br />Approval <br />Issue: Under Minnesota law, financing the <br />maintenance of streets can be a challenge for <br />city councils. Minn. Stat. § 475.58 subd. 3b <br />authorizes a city council, by unanimous <br />vote, to approve the issuance of bonds to <br />finance street reconstruction or bituminous <br />overlays without voter approval. The <br />unanimous council approval requirement is <br />further subject to a reverse referendum <br />process whereby a number equal to five <br />percent of those voting in the last municipal <br />general election can petition for a <br />referendum to approve the issuance of the <br />bonds. <br />Response: Street maintenance is one of <br />the essential functions of cities in <br />Minnesota. The laws governing issuance <br />of bonds to maintain streets should be <br />amended to allow the approval of the <br />bonds by a simple majority of the council. <br />The existing reverse referendum process <br />assures that taxpayers could trigger a <br />referendum on the issuance of bonds if <br />they can meet the five percent petition <br />threshold. <br />League of Minnesota Cities <br />2015 City Policies Page 110 <br />