[Mpls] LGA Cuts

[Bensonale]

David Brauer writes:

Public plea: I do hope someone more experienced than I from the city or =
MCDA
weighs in here. I'm doing my best as a lay person to answer these =
questions
(which I need to know for my day job). However, now is a CRITICAL time =
to
educate the public with the facts. If someone from the city doesn't have =
a
ready answer they can post here, they need one NOW.

SB:  I am doing this by memory, so these numbers are rough.  (But I walk through these numbers daily, so I think it should be close.)  The City's general fund, which provides police, fire, and infrastructure maintenance money, is approximately $263 million.  The Governor's proposed 2003 cut to Minneapolis' share of LGA of over $27 million exceeds 10% of the general fund and the proposed 2004 cut to Minneapolis' LGA of over $54 million exceeds 20% of the general fund.

David is right that the Governor has used a number of overall spending that includes enterprise and other funds not available, pursuant to legislation, to fund basic city services.  As I understand it, the Governor's total spending number includes items like the sales tax used to support the convention center, which is dedicated to fund the convention center and, I believe, cannot be switched to fund general fund activities rather than the convention center.  It also includes the enterprise funds (sewer, water, garbage, etc.)  in which fees are collected to pay for services.  Again, the City cannot use that money for things other than the services for which the fees are collected and we are also prohibited from collecting more in fees than it costs to deliver the services.  (So, running a surplus in the enterprise funds and shifting that money to cover general fund activities is prohibited.)

I understand that the Governor's number also includes the CDBG money received from the Federal government, which, as we know from our NRP discussion, has several restrictions on its use.  The Governor's total spending number may include many other things, and that we are still analyzing.

I think it is disengenuous to argue that this is only a 5% cut and cities that can't cut 5% from budgets without touching police and fire are incompetent.  This cut comes directly from the general fund, over 70% of which is dedicated to providing police, fire and infrastructure maintenance, and the City is not allowed by law to tap into other funds included in the "total spending" number by the Governor to pay for police and fire.

Scott Benson
Council Member
Ward 11