Agenda - Council - 07/28/1981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

city or town cannot receive a total aid amount which is less than what it received in the preceding year, most of its aid was determined in the preceding year. This "grandfather" level accounts for about 90% of the total aid distributed to the levy limit cities and towns in 1981, drops to as low as 82% under the eight alternative projections for 1982 when the 1980 census is used to determine the total per capita aid to distribute, and then increases until by 1986 it accounts for at least 91% of the total aid distributed under each of the eight projections. This percentage continues to hold through 1990. Another reason for the very high consistency in the relative distribution of Local Government Aid under the new formula is that the minimum and maximum limits interfere with the distribution of the Local Government Aid increase according to the presumed measure of need under the formula (local revenue base minus 10 mills times the adjusted assessed value). They effectively limit the range that the increase can have. As has been J • previously mentioned, the vast majority of the levy limit cities and towns receive their Local Government Aid increase on the basis of the limits rather than on the preliminary state aid factor. A third reason for the very high consistency in the relative distribution of Local Government Aid results from the fact that, for each year in each of the alternative projections, most of the cities and towns receive their Local Government Aid increase on the basis of their minimum state aid factor. This factor provides a minimum increase which varies in accordance with the level of a city or town's average equalized mill rate. An average equalized mill rate of 10 mills or less qualifies for the lowest per capita aid increase 2