HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 04Memorandum
To: Mayor and Council
City Administrator
From: Dennis Feller, Finance Director
Date: August 23, 2013
Re: Budget Discussion Topics
The City Council, at its July 24 work session, reviewed the 2014 -15 Budget and Tax Levy
Overview. At the work session the council directed staff to prioritize the budget and tax levy.
The council also asked for information regarding property tax impacts. The memo herein
provides a discussion of the following:
a. Non - Property Tax Priorities
b. Proposed Maximum Tax Levy
c. Summary Major Tax Levy Changes
d. Prioritization of Budget Additions Supported by Property Taxes
e. Property Tax Levy Scenarios and Impacts
f. Factors affecting property taxes
g. Truth in Taxation Process
1
City of Lakeville
Finance Department
Staff is seeking Council direction at the August 28 work session regarding the proposed
budget and the preliminary 2014 property tax levy.
a. Non - Property Tax Priorities
There are a number of initiatives, including projects, provided in the proposed 2014 -
2015 budget which is not financed with property taxes. A summary of the major priorities
are shown on Exhibit A.
The General Fund and Special Revenue Funds non - property tax priorities (Exhibit A - page
1) are financed from building permit revenues, fees collected at the time of platting, cable
TV franchise fees, or user fees. Liquor and utility priorities (Exhibit A - page 2) are
financed with sales or utility fees.
Capital Improvement projects priorities are identified in the five year capital improvement
plan.
b. Proposed Maximum Property Tax Levy
The proposed property tax levy presented at the July 24 work session was $24,353,697
and $25,631,646 for 2014 and 2015 respectively. A summary of the proposed 2014
property tax levy and estimated 2015 levy is as follows:
Tax Levy - Summary
General Fund - Operations
Equipment
Pavement Management
Debt- Street Improvement
Debt- Public facilities
Debt - Parks and arena
NOTE ( *) - Funds subject to Levy Limits.
Levy
17,367,765
1,236,150
3,029,063
2,010,019
665,500
2
Increase
(decrease)
Levy
1,490,246 17,892,765
(592,235) 375,000
6,150 1,242,331
238,043 3,413,341
123,400 1,989,559
(36,292) 323,275
Increase
(decrease)
525,000
375,000
6,181
384,278
(20,460)
(342,225)
Trail Improvement and Park
* Capital Reserve Fund 45,200 45,200 395,375 350,175
Total $ 24,353,697 $ 1,274,512 $ 25,631,646 $ 1,277,949
The Council has the ability to adopt a final tax levy in December that is equal to or less than
the preliminary tax levy approved in September. It may not, however, adopt a final tax levy
that is greater than the preliminary tax levy.
c. Summary: Major Property Tax Levy Changes
The major increases in the proposed property tax levy in the respective categories are as
follows:
Prior Year Tax Levy
1 - Legislative Mandates
2 - Debt management
3 - Maintain infrastructure
4 - Maintain Service Levels
5 - Prepare for the Future
Proposed Tax Levy
City of Lakeville
Proposed 2014 -2015 Property Tax Levy
Summary - Major Tax Levy Changes
Total Increase
3
Tax Levy
2014
2015
23,079,185
(30,478)
123,400
277,364
859,226
45,000
1,274,512 5.5%
24,353,697
Property Tax Levy Increase
Less: increase in tax base due to new construction
Net increase in overall City property taxes
-0.1%
0.5%
1.2%
3.7%
0.2%
5.5%
-2.2%
3.3%
24,353,697
(22,108) -0.1%
(20,460) -0.1%
749,146 3.1%
606,371 2.5%
(35,000) -0.1%
1,277,949 5.2%
25,631,646
The 2014 property tax levy as proposed at the July 24 city council work session
represented a 5.5% increase over the 2013 tax levy. The City tax base has grown by 2.2%
as a result of new residential construction. The growth in tax base means the net increase
in the overall City property tax levy is therefore 3.3% of which 1.1% is for street
reconstruction projects.
d. Prioritization of Budget Additions Supported by Property
Taxes
The City Council, at its July 24 work session, directed staff to prioritize the budget financed
by property taxes starting with the 2013 property tax levy as the base. The Prioritization
of Budget Additions Supported by Property Taxes — Proposed 2014 Tax levy is attached
as Exhibit B.
The staff is recommending the 2014 tax levy as proposed on July 24 be reduced by
$89,657 by adjusting the start dates of the new positions and financing street light
replacement with street light fees rather than taxes.
SUMMARY OF REVISED PROPOSED TAX LEVY
Tax Levy Proposed July 2013
Proposed Adjustments to July 2013 tax levy
Pavement Management Fund includes 2014 appropriation
of $61,600 for street light replacement on Kenrick Avenue.
The adjustment is premised on financing the street Tight
replacement from the Street Light Fund rather than the
Pavement Management Fund.
Street light replacement from Street Light Fund - to be
financed with a $1.34/yr. per residential unit increase in
Street light fee (2yr amortization)
NEW Position - Police Investigator (1/1/2014 to 7/1/2014) (43,781)
NEW Position - Service Tech (6/1/2014 to 8/1/2014)
4
Adjust
(30, 800)
% incr
Cumulative / (dec)
Total of 2013
$ 24, 353, 697
(15,077) (89,657) -0.4%
Net Revised Proposed Tax Levy 24,264,040 5.1%
The staff will provide a prioritization of 2015 budget additions supported by property
taxes once direction is provided regarding the 2014 tax levy.
5.5%
e. Property Tax Levy Scenarios and Impacts
What impact will the proposed 2014 tax levy have on property owners?
Property Tax Levy Scenarios. The impact will depend in part on the tax levy
amount. For illustration purposes, five scenarios were selected.
Scenerio
A
B
C
D
E
2014
Proposed
Levy
$ 23,079,185
$ 23,586,927
$ 23,892,113
$ 24,122,905
$ 24,353,697
5
Increase
Compared to
2013
507,742
812,928
1,043 ,720
1,274,512
0.0%
2.2%
3.5%
4.5%
5.5%
Options
A. Represents a 2014 tax levy equal to the 2013 tax levy.
B. If the 2014 tax levy was adjusted based on a corresponding increase due to new
residential construction (2.2 %), the tax levy would increase by $507,742 to a 2014
total City levy of $23.586 million.
C. If the levy is increased by 3.5 %, the total City levy would be $23.892 million
D. If the levy is increased by 4.5 %, the total City levy would be $24.122 million
E. The maximum levy as a result of levy limits is $24.353 million as proposed at the
July 24 work session — which represents a 5.5% increase in the overall City tax levy.
The tax rate calculations for each of the 5 scenarios are shown on Exhibit C.
Tax Impact on Median Value Home. The median value of a residential home
increased 3.7% to $225,000 for taxes payable 2014. The net impact of each scenario on a
median value home is as follows:
Total Tax Levy
Taxes
Tax Increase $
Tax Impact on Median Value Home
Median Value (2013 - $216,900)
2014 - Scenerio
A
B C D E
No Change 2.2% 3.5% 4.5% 5.5%
23,079,185 23,586,927 23,892,113 24,122,905 24,353,697
Market Value - $225,000 ( +3.7 %)
$ 834 $
(5) $
855 $ 867 $
6
877 $ 886
15 $ 28 $ 37 $ 47
Tax Impact on single family residential properties. The median value of a
residential home increased 3.7% to $225,000; however there is a wide dispersion of
increases /decreases in residential properties. A discussion of the dispersion is provided on
page 9.
In previous years, the budget document provided an illustration of the property tax levy on
the average residential property. Although the impact varied between properties based on
value, the trends were at least analogous. For 2013 (taxes payable 2014), there is a fairly wide
diversion in changes in values, even within property classes.
In order to obtain a better understanding of the tax impacts on residential property owners,
the estimated tax rates were applied to more than 14,000 single family homesteads based for
each of the five scenarios described above. A summary of tax levy impacts is as follows:
Scenerio
A
B
C
D
E
No Change
2.20%
+3.5%
+4.5%
+5.5%
% of
% of
% of
% of
% of
Home
Home
Home
Home
Home
Owners
Owners
Owners
Owners
Owners
69.3%
27.2%
17.5%
12.9%
9.6%
14.5%
12.3%
6.4%
4.3%
3.1%
8.0%
20.7%
6.5%
5.6%
4.3%
4.2%
12.5%
16.7%
7.0%
5.2%
1.5%
16.7%
22.7%
15.1%
7.3%
0.8%
4.5%
13.9%
23.0%
13.6%
0.5%
2.7%
7.9%
10.3%
22.1%
0.4%
1.2%
4.1%
12.7%
9.6%
0.3%
0.7%
1.6%
4.2%
15.7%
0.1%
0.5%
0.8%
1.7%
4.2%
0.1 %
0.4%
0.6%
1.0%
1.9%
0.3%
0.6%
1.3%
2.2%
3.4%
Esti mated
Property tax
Increase /
(Decrease)
Decrease
0 -0.9%
1.0 - 1.9%
2.0 - 2.9%
3.0 - 3.9%
4.0 - 4.9%
5.0 - 5.9%
6.0 - 6.9%
7.0 - 7.9%
8.0 - 8.9%
9.0 - 9.9%
+ 10%
Estimated 2014 Property Tax Impact
Homesteaded Single Family Residential
Exhibit D: Estimated 2014 Property Tax Impacts - Homesteaded Single Family residential
illustrates the cumulative effect for each scenario. A graphic presentation is shown on
Exhibit E: Tax Impacts - Single Family Residential Homesteads.
A calculation of impacts on commercial and industrial properties will not be available until
October when the fiscal disparities (local) rate and fiscal disparities area wide rates are
published.
f. Factors affecting property taxes for individual residential homesteaded
property include
> Market Value Exclusion. The legislature replaced the Market Value Homestead
Credit program with the Market Value Exclusion program starting in 2012.
Eligibility of the exclusion mimics the Market Value Homestead Credit program.
The program reduces the taxable market value by $30,400 for a $76,000 home. The
exclusion decreases by 9/10 of 1% percent for the value in excess of $76,000. Homesteads
with a market value of $413,800 and higher do not receive a credit. Non - residential
properties are also not eligible to receive the credit.
$450,000
$ 400,000
$ 350,000
$ 300,000
$ 250,000
$ 200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0
11 mi
1
�o �o 4:9 cso e cs o e e cp.O cso cpO
0 0+ 1, � 0+ � 0+ 3 0+ 0 0+ , . 0+ ( 3 0+ 0 0+ ,LOs 1 0+ 0 0+ 3 0+ 0,
N ft N ti ti ti 1, ti ti 3 3 3 3 3 D'
■ Taxable Market Value ■ Market Value Exclusion
In 2013 and previous years, the credit increased as values dropped thus resulting in a
contributing factor to reduced property taxes for residential properties. For the coming
year, however, taxes will increase faster than property values due in part to the Market
Value Exclusion. As property taxes increase, the credit will decrease thus resulting in a
potential increase in taxes. The lower value homes will experience a greater increase in
taxable market value than higher value homes or non - homesteaded properties.
If, for example, the home increases by 3.7 %, the tax capacity value — for a $255,000 home
- will increase by 4.4% due to the Market Value Exclusion.
Market Value of home $ 216,900 $ 225,000 3.7%
Market Value Exclusion (17,719) (16,990) -4.1%
Taxable Market Value $ 199,181 $ 208,010 4.4%
Tax Capacity - class rate 1% 1%
Tax Capacity Value $ 1,992 $ 2,080 4.4%
8
2013
Increase/
2014 (decrease)
Dispersion of residential market values. As stated previously, the
median value of a residential home increased 3.7% to $225,000; however there is a
wide dispersion of increases /decreases in residential properties. Exhibit F provides
a map illustration of the changes in market values. The following is a table
illustrating the dispersion of valuation changes.
Percentage Total
Change # parcels
< .5% 2,019 12%
- .5% to .5% 944 5%
.5% to 2.5% 2,019 12%
2.5% to 5.0% 7,198 41%
5.0% to 7.5% 4,066 23%
> 7.5% 1,100 6%
Tota I 17,346 100%
Diversion of market values between property classes.
Minnesota's economic health is improving which in turn results in an increase in
residential property values; however, the assessor's 2013 market value (property
taxes payable 2014) for commercial and industrial properties is decreasing. In
previous years, residential values dropped while commercial and industrial values
remained relatively stable. In other words, the 2013 property values (for taxes
payable 2014) are a reversal of valuation trends and thus will result in a property
tax increase for residential properties and a decrease for commercial - industrial
properties. The trends are illustrated in the following table:
USG Class
Assessors Market Values
2013 values I Increasel(decrease) due to:
for Taxes Pay Market New
2014 Conditions Construction
A- Residential 4,099,174,398 147,675,451 73,754,000 3.8%
B - Commercial 519,378,700 (5,003,600) 12,110,600 -1.0%
C - Industrial 139,553,500 (4,721,200) 2,023,500 -3.3%
J - Apartments 119,516,200 1,305,100 11,367,000 1.2%
F - Agricultural 73,254,837 9,008,463 14.0%
D - Utility 7,994,600 - 0.0%
F5 - Rural Vacant 7,406,900 173,100 2.4%
K - Railroads 4,068,000 (79,800) -1.9%
G - Cabins 747,600 26,300 3.6%
P - Personal Property 44,019,500 (267,500) 267,500 -0.6%
Totals 5,015,114,235 148,116,314 99,522,600 3.1%
9
Change in
Market
Conditions
Fiscal disparities. Lakeville's residential property owners will pay 2/10 of
1% more in 2014 property taxes as a result of the fiscal disparities formula.
Local government units within the seven county Twin Cities metropolitan area have
participated in a property tax base sharing program known as Metropolitan Fiscal
Disparities. Under the program, a portion of the growth in commercial, industrial, and
public utility property value of each community is contributed to a tax base sharing
pool. Each community receives a distribution of property value from the pool based
on the market value and population of each city.
Contribution. The contribution to the pool is equal to 40 percent of the growth in
commercial, industrial, and public utility property value since the base year -1971. This
measure of growth includes both new construction and inflationary increases in
existing property values. The contribution value is not available for local tax purposes
and therefore, the contribution value must be subtracted from the total tax capacity of
each community before the local tax rate is computed.
Distribution. The tax capacity contributed to the pool is based on a distribution
index. This index compares each city's total market value per capita to the average
market value per capita for all cities and towns in the seven counties. Cities that have
relatively less market value per capita receive a relatively larger distribution from the
pool than cities with greater market value wealth per capita.
g) Truth in Taxation Process
Minnesota Statutes require cities to certify the proposed property tax levy to the County
Treasurer /Auditor and adopt a proposed budget on or before September 16.
The County Treasurer /Auditor will mail the parcel specific Truth in Taxation notices in
mid - November. These notices inform property owners of the time and place of the
budget hearings and the impact of the proposed property tax levy.
City councils are also required to certify to the County Treasurer /Auditor the date for
the public presentation of the budget and tax levy as well as receiving public
comments.
Staff is recommending the budget and tax levy be presented at the regularly
scheduled meeting on Monday December 2 with final approval on December 16.
10
EXHIBITS
A. Non - property Tax Initiatives
B. Prioritization of Budget Additions Supported by Property Taxes
C. Property Tax Levy Scenarios
D. Estimated 2014 Property Tax Impact - Homestead Single Family
Residential
E. Graph: Tax Impacts - Homestead Single Family Residential
F. Map: Property Value changes
11
EXHIBIT A
Non - property Tax Initiatives
EXHIBIT A
City of Lakeville
2014 -2015 Budget
Non - Property Taxes Supported
Major Cost Drivers (Increases over 2013 Adopted Budget)
I GENERAL AND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Communications
Capital Outlay
Bi- annual community survey
Attorney Fees - Franchise renewal
Community & Econ Development
Marketing Strategy implementation
Inspections
Electrical Inspections
Capital Outlay
Code Enforcement (NEW)
Engineering
Engineering Technician (NEW)
Capital Outlay
Heritage Center
Utilities & other related costs
Bldg repairs - lighting /electrical
Cleaning supplies & services
Personnel (Transitions)
TOTAL GENERAL AND SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
Page 1
Non -Tax Levy Items
2014
(23,552)
20,000
(5,000)
54,492
1,347
22,370
65,925
78,788
4,508
2,695
9,131
100,349
2015
6,714
(20, 000)
(15,000)
(22,460)
4,255
2,032
(75,788)
4,637
331,053 (115,610)
2014 -2015 Budget
Non - Property Taxes Supported
Major Cost Drivers (Increases over 2013 Adopted Budget)
Major Maintenance
Capital Outlay
Major Maintenance - building
Major Maintenance - Roof
Meter replacement
Well rehab
Water main repair
Capital Outlay
Lift Station rehab
1/1 mitigation
Sewer line rehab
Captial outlay
Non -Tax Levy Items
2014
i
LIQUOR
i
9,000
40,233 112,150
i
WATER
i
32,700
27,000
375,970
60,000
1,243,187
67,740
i
SANITARY SEWER
i
123,000
77,000
175,000
290,609
2015
634,000
422,090
60,000
2,261,794
118,549
70,000
77,000
175,000
118,549
i
ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES
i
City Forester (New) (includes capital outlay )
Page 2
119,490 (26,930)
EXHIBIT B
Prioritization of Budget Additions
Supported by Property Taxes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
EXHIBIT B
Prioritization of Budget Additions Supported by Property Taxes
Proposed 2014 Tax Levy
As of 8/26/2013
(Subject to future review)
2013 Tax Levy
% incr Adjust
Cumulative / (dec) For
Adjust Total of 2013 Growth
23,079,185 -2.2%
Police PERA increase
Elections - staff
Sales tax - reduction
Elections - MODUS software
Legislative Mandates
41,722 23,120,907 0.2% -2.0%
58,560 23,179,467 0.4% -1.8%
(140,360) 23,039,107 -0.2% -2.4%
9,600 23,048,707 -0.1% -2.3%
Public Facilities
Parks and Arena's (Debt)
Debt Management
23,400 23,072,107 0.0% -2.2%
(36,292) 23,035,815 -0.2% -2.4%
Infrastructure Improvements
Street improvements
Equipment Fund acquisitions and replacements
Trail Improvements
Elimination of the tax levy for trail improvements results in
(a) increased future tax levies or (b) reduction of planned
maintenance and degradation of trails system.
Building Fund - improvements
The Building Fund is comprised primarily of major
maintenance activates and is financed from one time
revenues. Subject to other time revenue sources, it is
anticipated that annual tax levies of $2- 400,000 per year
are required in 2019 and future years.
238,043 23,273,858 0.8% -1.4%
23,273,858 0.8% -1.4%
45,200 23,319,058 1.0% -1.2%
23,319,058 1.0% -1.2%
Pavement
Management Fund
Other
Pavement Management Fund includes 2014 appropriation of
$61,600 for street light replacement on Kenrick Avenue.
The adjustment is premised on financing the street light
replacement from the Street Light Fund rather than the
Pavement Management Fund.
Street light replacement from Street Light Fund - to be
financed with a $1.34/yr. per residential unit increase in
Street light fee (2yr amortization)
(30,800) 23,288,258 0.9% -1.3%
Page 1
LLI
W
J
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
2013 Tax Levy
Revenues and other
sources
Parks
Fire
Committees &
Commissions
Committees &
Commissions
Police
Parks
Various
Community & Econ
Development
General Gov't
Facilities
Engineering
General Gov't
Facilities
Police
Police
General Gov't
Facilities
Police
Fire
Streets
Recreation
Police
Police
Police
Information Sys.
Finance
Fire
Streets
Streets
Heritage Center
Services Levels and growth
Financing options for maintaining service levels are (a) tax
levy as shown below (b) reduced expenditures and service
levels (c) use of fund balances and reserves - General,
Pavement Management, Liquor and /or Municipal
Reserves. Reductions in fund balances and reserves affects
City ability to react to unforeseen events, economic
fluctuations and future City property tax policy.
Revenues and other sources
Major maintenance projects (2013)
Rookie Fire Fighter class - 2013 (15)
Pan -O -Prog - waste disposal paid directly by POP
Pan -O -Prog - staff regular hours coded to department
Clothing for 10 Reserve Officers
Mower renting
Miscellaneous
EDC Strategic Planning Session Consultant
Printer cartridges
MNDOT Bridge Inspections
Contract cleaning
Contractual cleaning
Contract auto repair - reduction based on historical costs
Gas & Electric
Gas & Electric
Gas & Electric
Gas and electric, repairs, and cleaning (CMF)
Fiber connection
Dakota Communications Center
MAAG dues increase from $5,000 - $8,300
Domestic Preparedness
Software Agreements
Actuary Study - GASB #45 compliance
Rookie fire Fighter class - 2014 (5)
Motor Fuels
Salt
Utilities & Fiber connection
(233,559)
(60,350)
(56,565)
(5,814)
23,054,699 -0.1% -2.3%
22,994,349 -0.4% -2.6%
22,937,784 -0.6% -2.8%
22,931,970 -0.6% -2.8%
(13,427) 22,918,543 -0.7% -2.9%
(18,389) 22,900,154 -0.8% -3.0%
(14,013) 22,886,141 -0.8% -3.0%
(5,353) 22,880,788 -0.9% -3.1%
(5,000) 22,875,788 -0.9% -3.1%
(5,060) 22,870,728 -0.9% -3.1%
(3,500) 22,867,228 -0.9% -3.1%
(11,262) 22,855,966 -1.0% -3.2%
(17,540) 22,838,426 -1.0%
(5,000) 22,833,426 -1.1%
(5,570) 22,827,856 -1.1%
8,227
3,300
2,808
18,130
2,000
27,620
13,577
34,620
1,742
23,046,874
23,050,174
23,052,982
23,071,112
23,073,112
23,100,732
23,114,309
23,148,929
23,150,671
- 0.1%
- 0.1%
- 0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.1%
0.2%
0.3%
0.3%
- 3.2%
- 3.3%
- 3.3%
654 22,828,510 -1.1%
(3,379) 22,825,131 -1.1%
(11,234) 22,813,897 -1.1%
(4,500) 22,809,397 -1.2% -3.4%
- 3.3%
- 3.3%
- 3.3%
Personnel (salary adjustments for existing new employees) 229,250 23,038,647 -0.2% -2.4%
- 2.3%
- 2.3%
- 2.3%
- 2.2%
- 2.2%
- 2.1%
- 2.0%
- 1.9%
- 1.9%
Page 2
Cumulative
Adjust Total
23,079,185
% incr Adjust
/ (dec) For
of 2013 Growth
- 2.2%
W
J
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
2013 Tax Levy
Services Levels and growth
Heritage Center Bldg. repairs - rooftop unit /insp 7,675 23,158,346 0.3% -1.9%
Streets Signs for developments 10,000 23,168,346 0.4% -1.8%
Contingency - personnel 436,754 23,605,100 2.3% 0.1%
Fire fighter compensation 15,250 23,620,350 2.3% 0.1%
Fire Pay for Calls - Estimated 5% increase in number of calls 4,868 23,625,218 2.4% 0.2%
Police Motor fuels 5,247 23,630,465 2.4% 0.2%
Police Ammunition supplies 3,000 23,633,465 2.4% 0.2%
Streets Shop materials and parts 7,753 23,641,218 2.4% 0.2%
Legal Legal 17,219 23,658,437 2.5% 0.3%
Police Prosecution costs (14,049) 23,644,388 2.4% 0.2%
Police Chaplaincy Program 2,550 23,646,938 2.5% 0.3%
Fire Annual Cost: Active 911 Service (NEW) 1,237 23,648,175 2.5% 0.3%
Streets Patching supplies and materials 5,322 23,653,497 2.5% 0.3%
Fire Pay for Calls - Rate increase ($1 /call in each year) 12,927 23,666,424 2.5% 0.3%
Annual cost : Target Training Solutions subscription fees &
Fire 7,024 23,673,448 2.6% 0.4%
increased training pay for online training courses (NEW)
Police NEW Position - Police Investigator (1/1/2013)
87,561 23,761,009 3.0% 0.8%
Police NEW Position - Police Investigator (1/1/2014 to 7/1/2014) (43,781) 23,717,229 2.8% 0.6%
General Gov't
Copy machine maintenance 8,637 23,725,866 2.8% 0.6%
Facilities
Engineering Traffic /Intersection studies 5,000 23,730,866 2.8% 0.6%
Streets Equipment parts, tires and diagnostic software 11,275 23,742,141 2.9% 0.7%
Streets Contracted equipment repairs 5,300 23,747,441 2.9% 0.7%
Parks Fuel and tires 4,974 23,752,415 2.9% 0.7%
Parks Other commodities 5,996 23,758,411 2.9% 0.7%
Parks Parks - seasonal employees (contracted) 38,550 23,796,961 3.1% 0.9%
Streets NEW Position - Fleet Service Tech Supervisor (6/1/2014) 45,230 23,842,191 3.3% 1.1%
Streets NEW Position - Fleet Service Tech Supervisor (6/1/2014 to (15,077) 23,827,114 3.2% 1.0%
8/1/2014)
Heritage Center Bldg. repairs - lighting /electrical 4,330 23,831,444 3.3% 1.1%
Lexipol - Risk Mgmt. polices and resources - subscription
Police fee /annual cost 8,950 23,840,394 3.3% 1.1%
Parks - Major Maint Field improvements (King, Quigley, Michaud)
Parks - Major Maint STS Labor
Streets - pavement management
10,000
20,000
6,150
23,850,394
23,870,394
23,876,544
3.3%
3.4%
3.5%
1.1%
1.2%
1.3%
Insurance
Other
Cost increase is due to anticipated changes in experience
modification ratio.
If appropriations for insurance cost increases are
eliminated, the Municipal Reserves balances will be
reduced and may impact long term financial policy
83,463 23,960,007 3.8% 1.6%
Page 3
Ad lust
% incr Adjust
Cumulative / (dec) For
Total of 2013 Growth
23,079,185
-2.2%
W
J
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
2013 Tax Levy
Heritage Center
Police
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
Parks - Major Maint
General Gov't
Facilities
General Gov't
Facilities
Services Levels and growth
Capital outlay
Seasonal CSO (2)
STS /Tree Trust /Eagle Scout Project
Floor replacements (5 and 2)
Tree plantings
Shelter /Warm House re- shingle (3 and 1)
Picnic tables
Fence replacement - Antlers
Warming house repairs - 2014
Hockey rink end board replacement
Tree Trust Labor
Rink repairs (Highview)
Sign replacement
LED Lighting - Michaud
Basketball court resurface (1) - 2014
Bench replacement - 2014
Laminate countertops - Parks /Insp. /Engineering
Add controls to generator
24,263
14,170
10,000
13,700
20,000
15,800
5,000
8,500
1,250
1,500
5,000
12,150
10,000
8,300
2,700
2,500
23,984,270
23, 998,440
24,008,440
24,022,140
24, 042,140
24,057,940
24,062,940
24,071,440
24,072,690
24, 074,190
24,079,190
24,091,340
24,101, 340
24,109, 640
24,112,340
24,114, 840
3.9%
4.0%
4.0%
4.1%
4.2%
4.2%
4.3%
4.3%
4.3%
4.3%
4.3%
4.4%
4.4%
4.5%
4.5%
4.5%
1.7%
1.8%
1.8%
1.9%
2.0%
2.0%
2.1%
2.1%
2.1%
2.1%
2.1%
2.2%
2.2%
2.3%
2.3%
2.3%
1,600 24,116,440 4.5% 2.3%
2,600 24,119,040 4.5% 2.3%
Debt Management
Other
Proposed levy was intended to reapportion Liquor
contributions ($100.000) from Debt (Police Station) to
Equipment Fund (for Police Equipment) thereby resulting in 100,000 24,219,040 4.6% 2.4%
a increase in debt levy and reduction in future levies for
equipment.
Elimination of proposed levy results in the $100,000
reapportionment of Liquor funds to debt rather than the
Equipment Fund ; the reapportionment could result in
higher future tax levies for the Equipment Fund and lower
tax basis if levy limits are reinstated.
Engineering
Preparing for the Future
CSAH -50 Study Phase 2 (city portion)
45,000 24,264,040 5.1% 2.9%
Page 4
Ad lust
% incr Adjust
Cumulative / (dec) For
Total of 2013 Growth
23,079,185 - 2.2%
W
J
134
135
136
137
138
139
143
SUMMARY OF REVISED PROPOSED TAX LEVY
Tax Levy Proposed July 2013
2013 Tax Levy
Ad lust
140 Proposed Adjustments to July 2013 tax levy
Pavement Management Fund includes 2014 appropriation of
$61,600 for street light replacement on Kenrick Avenue.
141 The adjustment is premised on financing the street light (30,800)
replacement from the Street Light Fund rather than the
Pavement Management Fund.
Street light replacement from Street Light Fund - to be
142 financed with a $1.34/yr. per residential unit increase in
Street light fee (2yr amortization)
144 NEW Position - Police Investigator (1/1/2014 to 7/1/2014) (43,781)
145
146 NEW Position - Service Tech (6/1/2014 to 8/1/2014) (15,077) (89,657)
147
148 Net Proposed Tax Levy 24,264,040 5.1%
Page 5
% incr Adjust
Cumulative / (dec) For
Total of 2013 Growth
23,079,185 -2.2%
$ 24,353,697 5.5% # # # ##
EXHIBIT C
Property Tax Scenarios
)<,-&-8'
'MX]SJ0EOIZMPPI
4VSTIVX]8E\0IZ]7GIREVMSW
%GXYEP
%&'()
2S'LERKI
8SXEP8E\0IZ]
2IX8E\'ETEGMX]
%GXYEP)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI
8E\'ETEGMX]:EPYI
8E\-RGVIQIRX
)78-1%8)(
*MWGEPHMWTEVEXMIW'SRXVMFYXMSR
2IX8E\'ETEGMX]
8E\'ETEGMX]6EXI
)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI
8E\PIZ]
*MWGEPHMWTEVMXMIW
2IXXE\PIZ]
2IX8E\'ETEGMX]
8E\'ETEGMX]6EXI
1EVOIX:EPYI8E\6EXI
)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI)WXMQEXI
1EVOIX:EPYI
8E\PIZ]JSV4EVO&SRHW
8E\VEXIFEWIHSRQEVOIXZEPYI
EXHIBIT D
Estimated 2014 Property Tax Impact
Homestead Single Family Residential
Estimated
Property tax
Increase /
(Decrease)
Decrease
0 - 0.9%
1.0 - 1.9%
2.0 - 2.9%
3.0 - 3.9%
4.0 - 4.9%
5.0 - 5.9%
6.0 - 6.9%
7.0 - 7.9%
8.0 - 8.9%
9.0 - 9.9%
+ 10%
EXHIBIT D
Estimated 2014 Property Tax Impact
Homesteaded Single Family Residential
Scenerio
A
B
C
D
E
No Change
2.20%
+ 3.5%
+ 4.5%
+ 5.5%
% of .,e
% of
.e
% of
.
% of
.
% of
.e
Home
Ja c
( ,o�
Home
,'' ' c
( ,off
Home
,'' ' c
( ,off
Home
,'' ' c
( ,o'
Home
,'' ' c
( ,o'
Owners
%
Owners
%
Owners
%
Owners
%
Owners
%
69.3%
69.3%
27.2%
27.2%
17.5%
17.5%
12.9%
12.9%
9.6%
9.6%
14.5%
83.8%
12.3%
39.5%
6.4%
23.9%
4.3%
17.2%
3.1%
12.7%
8.0%
91.8%
20.7%
60.2%
6.5%
30.4%
5.6%
22.8%
4.3%
17.0%
4.2%
96.0%
12.5%
72.7%
16.7%
47.1%
7.0%
29.8%
5.2%
22.2%
1.5%
97.5%
16.7%
89.4%
22.7%
69.8%
15.1%
44.9%
7.3%
29.5%
0.8%
98.3%
4.5%
93.9%
13.9%
83.7%
23.0%
67.9%
13.6%
43.1%
0.5%
98.8%
2.7%
96.6%
7.9%
91.6%
10.3%
78.2%
22.1%
65.2%
0.4%
99.2%
1.2%
97.8%
4.1%
95.7%
12.7%
90.9%
9.6%
74.8%
0.3%
99.5%
0.7%
98.5%
1.6%
97.3%
4.2%
95.1%
15.7%
90.5%
0.1%
99.6%
0.5%
99.0%
0.8%
98.1%
1.7%
96.8%
4.2%
94.7%
0.1%
99.7%
0.4%
99.4%
0.6%
98.7%
1.0%
97.8%
1.9%
96.6%
0.3%
100.0%
0.6%
100.0%
1.3%
100.0%
2.2%
100.0%
3.4%
100.0%
Estimated
Property tax
Increase /
(Decrease)
Decrease
0 - 0.9%
1.0 - 1.9%
2.0 - 2.9%
3.0 - 3.9%
4.0 - 4.9%
5.0 - 5.9%
6.0 - 6.9%
7.0 - 7.9%
8.0 - 8.9%
9.0 - 9.9%
+ 10%
EXHIBIT D
Estimated 2014 Property Tax Impact
Homesteaded Single Family Residential
EXIBIT E
GRAPH: Tax Impacts — Homestead
Single Family Residential
EXHIBIT E
Tax Impacts - Homestead Single Family Residential
15,000
13,500
12,000
10,500
9,000
7,500 -�
6,000
4,500
3,000
1,500
1
lel
1
A B C D E
Levy Options
• Decrease • 0 -1% • 1 -2% ❑ 2 -3% ❑ 3 -4% ❑ 4 -5% ❑ 5 -6% ❑ 6 -7% ❑ 7 -8% ❑ 8 -9% • 9 -10% • > 10%
EXHIBIT F
MAP: Property Value Changes
)<,-&-8*
4VSTIVX]:EPYI'LERKIW
/HJHQG
3HUFHQW&KDQJHLQ3URSHUW\9DOXH
WR
WR
WR
WR
!
0LOHV