Agenda - Council - 12/20/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I I I its population by a per capita dollar amount set by the legislature.3/ See, e.g., Minno Stat. § 477A.01, subd. 1 (1971). The county government's share was deducted from this amount, and the balance of the county pot was apportioned to the cities within the county in accordance with the statutory formula in effect at the time. See, e.g., id. at subds. 2 and 4. The effect of this county pot system was that cities were competing only with other cities within their county for a share of the county allocation.4_/ The second feature in the 1971-79 formulas was a "grandfather" provision: no city could receive ]es~ ~d ~h~ it received in the previous year. See, e.g., Minn. Stat. § 477A.01, subd. 6 (1974). Because there was a limited amount of funds appropriated for local government aid for each year, the effect of the grandfather provison was to reduce or limit the growth in aid to other communities. Cities and towns whose formula-based aid would exceed their minimum I I ! I I I I (the amount they received the previous yea~) often had their actual aid amount reduced proportionately to allow other cities within the ~ame.county to reach their minimum, or grandfather, levels. The third constant up to 1979 was reliance on the 1970 federal census for population data used in computing aid amounts. See, e.g., ~linn. 3/ 4/ The metropolitan counties of Carver, Anoka, S~ott, Washington, Dakota, Hennepin and Ramsey were treated as a single county. E.g., Minn. Stat. § 477A.01, subd. 7 (1971). The City of Ramsey is located in Anoka County and therefore had to compete with the cit~_es in the seven-county metro area for its share of the metro "county" pot. -5-