My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01-08-1990 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1990
>
01-08-1990 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/17/2024 2:18:12 PM
Creation date
12/17/2024 2:15:48 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
373
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
The five major trends and example indicators measured by this program are:A. <br />B. <br />C. <br />D. <br />K°"population: ^Is there an increase or decrease in population? <br />Real estate: Is the taxable valuation of r-:^ estate growing too <br />slowly? »Retail sales: Does the growth or decline in che number of <br />businesses and retail sales reflect an overall economic recession <br />or an erosion of local economic vitality? Je hoaii-hSocial welfare: Is unemployment placing greater demands on health, <br />welfare, and social service programs? <br />2. <br />3. <br />4. <br />l!'^^Levy^nmit: Is the actual current levy rate at or approaching the <br />2. Earnlnyon^liiestLnts: Is the percent of revenues Cerived from <br />earnings on investments changing? rafoe <br />3. Tax collection rate: Is the trend in property tax collection rates <br />4. Revenue/expenditure comparisons: Is there a consistert pattern of <br />revenue shortfalls? <br />K^^Expenditures?^ Are the overall expenditures or expenditures by <br />function in line with the current rate of inflation? <br />Per capita expenditures: Are the municipal expenditures per capita <br />growing at a faster rate than the change in population? <br />interest and fiscal charges: Is the cost for interest and fiscal <br />charges escalating as a percent of total expenditures? <br />2. <br />3. <br />E. <br />K^'^D^t^^'^Is^future financial flexibility being lost due to a growing <br />debt burden? . o2. Bond rating: Is there a change in the bond rating? <br />3. Debt service payments: Are debt service payments becoming a larger <br />percentage of total revenues? , , . u , o4. Fund balance: Is there a decline in the general fund balance? <br />1. Auditor's opinion: Is there a consistent failure to obtain an <br />unqualified opinion on financial statements from independent <br />’uditL s? <br />‘pal employees: Is the number of municipal employees <br />'tent with current population trends? <br />er,ef“-s: Will growth in fringe benefits and employer-paid <br />jtions place undue demands on future revenues? <br />enterprises: Are the municipal enterprises incurring <br />2. <br />3. <br />4. Mu for losses or gains? <br />The MFHP was (level ^>d as an index of economic indicators to help elected <br />municipal officials determine fiscal trends. Identifying a negative trend does <br />not automatically spell fiscal decay. Rather, the answers to these and other <br />questions tell municipalities whether or not a sound fiscal course lies ahead. <br />9/89
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.