Laserfiche WebLink
Page -10- <br /> <br />(Robinson Affidavit, paragraph 8(b).) In addition, the formula acts in such an <br />arbitrary manner that cities with similar average equalized mill rates, adjusted <br />assessed values, property tax levies~ and revenue bases, do not receive similar <br />amounts of aid per capita. (Robinson Affidavit, paragraphs 9-12) Such disparities <br />as evidenced in Robinson's affidavit raise a significant question as to whether the <br />statute as applied results in an arbitrary distribution of funds and such a question <br />can only be resolved after a full evidentiary hearing. <br /> <br /> It should also be noted for the court that the State of Minnesota Department <br />of Revenue, one year prior to the initiation of this litigation, concluded that the <br />local government aid formula adopted in 1979 did not meet the purposes presented <br />for that legislation. The Department's study is entitled "Report On The Study of <br />The Local Government Aid Formula", and is dated December 18, 1980. (Report) The <br />Report was authored by Richard B. Gardner, Research Analyst for the Department <br />of Revenue, and is attached to Gardner's deposition as Exhibit "1". <br /> <br /> The purpose of the Report was in part "to determine whether or not the <br />inequities recognized under the old formula are reduced under the new formula and <br />to determine whether or not 'new inequities develop under the new formula." <br />Report at 19. The Report recognizes that the purpose of the new formula was as <br /> <br /> Report <br /> <br />set out by the League of Minnesota Cities in its proposal to the legislature. <br />at 16-18. <br /> <br /> The Report concluded that: <br /> <br /> 1. <br /> <br />"The preliminary state aid factor is relatively unimportant as the <br />basis for determining a levy limit city or town's Local Government <br />Aid ... This means that the new Local Government Aid formula <br />is not really sensitive to a city or town's local revenue base and its <br />adjusted assessed value. This is contrary to the apDarent intent__ . of <br />the formula since the emphasis of the formula is on the <br />preliminary state aid factor.. 2' <br /> <br />"... there is a very high correlation between the 1980 through <br />1990 distributions under the new formula and the 1979 distribution <br />under the old formula..." <br /> <br />I <br /> <br /> <br />