1. 4 positions in building department have been eliminated (about $300,000 savings)
2. Street Reconstruction is being funded from TIF 4 instead of General Fund (TIF allows for capital expenditures only & not operating exp) - about $305,000 now TIF Funded.
3. Capital Equipment Expenditures for items such as 3 police squads & 2 pickups with plows are purchased through capital equipment fund. This fund has been used for several years to fund the City's capital equipment purchases-Used to purchase through capital equipment certificates and Levy debt service to taxpayer (about $225,000)
4. In the past three years the City has retained in the General Fund excess revenues over expenditures from annual adopted budgets to offset forecasted shortages in 2010 (about $230,000) This retainage is being used to offset the annual internal loan repayment to the City on the PW site & the Municipal Building
5. Staff line item cuts on supplies, training, etc was reduced by approximately $156,000 We are moving towards going paperless saving thousands, etc.
6. Park & Rec Seasonal - includes seasonal & County Work crew was reduced by $46,000
7. Municipal Center lease to Anoka County $35,000
8. Newsletter ad outsourcing will Generate about $35,000 (net $5,000 in savings)
In fairness the article does not shed light on the fact that we lowered the general fund levy, but we raised the HRA levy, which is a separate levy, by $100,000. The net reduction $833,000.
All of these figures are based on a budget that still needs to be approved by the council. Perhaps we can find other ways to cut more?
Bob, I have noted that Anoka County employs several lobbyists registered with the Minnesota Campaign Finance Board. In the past, before the current City Administrator and new councilmembers took office, a Bonnie Balach [sp?] was registered as a lobbyist for City of Ramsey. I could not find any currently registered Ramsey lobbyist in looking at the DFB site, but I might have missed something.
ReplyDeleteWith that preamble, the question, has City of Ramsey vacated the lobbying-the-legislature-and-agencies business?
Also, if you care to get into any cost-benefit opinions, that is your choice. The question is does Ramsey spend money for lobbying now.
A second question, during your tenure on council, will City of Ramsey ever have a "Port Authority" if you can do anything to prevent it?
ReplyDeleteAfter all, we have no port. The colloquial term "Pork Authority" was invented because of how such a thing is so open to abusing citizen-taxpayers.
I would hope you strongly oppose the idea.
Already there is EDA, which issued the lease-revenue bonding for the city hall - palace, and the HRA which I believe has extensive fiscal powers supplemental to the City's own taxing and bonding authority.
Enough is enough - indeed too much already is, what else, too much!
Eric,
ReplyDeleteThe answer to your first comment is, the city has hired no lobbyists that I can recall during my time. The EDA is sharing the cost to have the Tinklinberg group work on hwy 10 issues. They are working with landowners to work deals to acquire land to be purchased with RALF fund dollars for the right of way to realign hwy 10 in the future.
This is the only lobbying that the city is paying for besides the lobbying that I and the council do, and that is dirt cheap for the city.
Eric,
ReplyDeleteThe answer to your second question is, absolutely NO port authority.
The issue of a port authority can up as a proposal from our former city administrator.
Seeing the direction that this council is taking, if the issue ever came up again, it would get shot down very quickly.
Ben is becoming vertical!