Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />! <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />! <br />I <br />! <br />! <br /> <br />method that would avoid imposing sudden and substantial aid <br />reductions on a large number of cities. It did this by establishing <br />a limit on how great a reduction could be imposed on any city from <br />one year to the next. The minimum aid level insures that a city's <br />annual reduction in local government aid cannot be larger than that <br />which could be made up by increasing the city levy by .75 mills. <br />The legislature further acted to assure that the cities called upon <br />to make up sizeable reductions in state aids were those best capable <br />of doing so. The formula provides that the larger a city's tax <br />base, the greater a reduction is permitted. Concomitantly, in order <br />to provide the additional revenue to meet the minimum aid levels <br />without increasing the total appropriation for local government aid <br />and to limit disproportionately large increases to some cities, the <br />legislature imposed the maximum aid factor, restricting annual <br />increases to any city to a maximum of 6%. <br /> <br /> Thus, the maximum and minimum levels serve the combined <br />purpose of allowing the legislature to put a limit on the total <br />appropriation for local government aid while at the same time <br />avoiding drastic changes, whether by increase or decrease, in the <br />amount of aid available to any particular city from year to year. <br />This in turn averts drastic changes in the amount of property taxes <br />that must be levied by a city from year to year. These purposes are <br />plainly legitimate, and the maximum and minimum aid levels are just <br />as plainly a rational means of effectuating them. <br /> <br />-25- <br /> <br /> <br />