Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />r <br />//o o'/ <br />v% ^ <br />v‘k./»•■ <br />:V''^■!<v^^2^>// <br />». <br />f. <br />CITY of OR( <br />MunictpAi OfRcts <br />Post OfBcc Bov 66 <br />Cr>5tai Ba>. Minncsou 55323 <br />June 26r 1991 <br />joBllen Hurt <br />930 partenwood Road <br />Long Lake, MN 55356 <br />Re: 1992 LMCD Budget <br />Dear joEllen, <br />On behalf of the Council, I want to express our issues <br />related to the proposed 1992 budget. The Counci 1 basically <br />supports Tonka Bay in the items listed in letter an <br />specifically have voiced their opinions on the following: <br />5% Growth — Since roost of the cities are in a No <br />Growth" 'nTode for the 1 992 budget it becomes difficult <br />when other agencies ate looking at 5% increases. <br />Council feels that it is appropriate that it be dropped <br />least a 3% growth protection, if not lower, since <br />the cities that ate over 2,500 will not be able to <br />receive any additional property tax monies for 1992. <br />Milfoil Funding - The City Council is very concerned <br />about the iacTc of any budget indicating soliciting <br />private donations together with the increase to the <br />cities. It additionally is concerned that the amou.it <br />put aside for other agencies, such as DNR and Hennepin <br />County may not be realized and that the brunt of the <br />orooram for '92 will come back upon the cities during a <br />very tight budget year. We realize that the only other <br />option is to get monies from the cities and/or privates <br />would be cutting back the program and from a planning <br />standpoint needs to be looked at immediately, if this <br />budget goes forward rather than waiting until 92. <br />The Council encourages seeking funding from Metropolitan <br />• ifloificance and should help pay tor cne ut,. <br />Additionally the suggestion of “volunteer Weed Eaters <br />may have some merit in an economically tight time. <br />■jq XPI10NE>47>-7357 • FAX--ITV0510