Minutes 05/18/1976 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

""u:' \ - :..' LJ MAY 18, 1976 TUESDAY As to those agencies responsible to the City Manager, I have reduced Departmental requests by about $89,000.00 in spite of my feeling that not enough paving is provided for, nor is enough equipment being replaced, for example. And, I am recommending that Council reduce the School Board budget by $40,000.00, with the proviso that if the School Board elects to eliminate from its budget the band uniforms, then, if the "Revenue Sharing" program is extended, and if the entitlement formula results in the City's receiving more that the $289,875.00 anticipated, Council would make a special appropriation for such uniforms, up to a maximum of $24,000.00. But the cuts made by me, or recommended to be made by Council, do not balance the budget. Accordingly, I recommend: 1. Authorize the Commissioner of the Revenue to assess motor vehicles at 100 percent, according to the NADA guide, rather than at the present 40 percent, but with a lowering of the personal property tax rate from $2.25 to $1.50, with a net increase of perhaps $60,000.00. Thus, such personal property as office equipment would have a lower tax, but owners of autos would pay more. This 100 percent proposal as to autos is in line with new State law which will soon require assessment of Real Estate at 100 percent. 2. Raise the tax rate from $1.85 to $2.00, on Real Estate and Public Service Corporations, to produce about $170,000.00. CONCLUS IONS: These are painful recommendations, but look ahead a year. In fiscal year 1978 there will be no $312,000.00 refund from APCO, and General Fund (including School) debt service will increase $81,373.00 over that of the upcoming year. A cruel paradox exists--drastica11y reduced tax base growth in the midst of steep inflation. So, unless this situation reverses, and unless the Legislature can be prevailed upon to allow cities additional sources of taxation, such as the piggy-back income tax, and unless the Legislature takes to heart the presentation the cities recently made to the (State) Appropriations Committee, property owners can look for a continually increasing (and unfair in my view) share of the cost of local government. And what if the Revenue Sharing program should not be extended?