Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />DECEMBER 4, 2000 <br />2001, however, the City has not been able to fully implement the <br />Committee's recommendation. This is because expense needs are greater <br />than the $20,000 expense increase the Committee projected for 2001. <br />Therefore, the City is proposing that taxes increase by an additional <br />$23,000, or 9% of the $255,400 that was available in 2001. <br />The Administrator reviewed the City's 2000 tax rate ranking, pointing out <br />that the Debt Levy recommendation had a big impact on this ranking. The <br />City's 2000 tax rate was 18.854% compared to 21.484% for 1999. Out of <br />other Ramsey County cities, 11 had higher rates while only 7 cities had <br />lower rates. Little Canada fell five spots in this ranking and has a tax rate <br />lower than Arden Hills, Maplewood, New Brighton, Roseville, and <br />Shoreview. <br />Some of the key factors in the 2001 tax rate include the fact that the net <br />levy is up by 3.81%. However, the City's tax base grew by over 15%. <br />The end result is Little Canada's tax rate drops by 9.85%. <br />The Administrator then reviewed the City's 2001 tax rate ranking, <br />pointing out that the City's tax rate is dropping from 18.854% to 17.032%. <br />This moves Little Canada down one additional spot in the list of 19 <br />Ramsey County cities, now falling below Noah St. Paul's tax rate as well. <br />The Administrator pointed out that property taxation is a very complicated <br />subject. There are many entities that affect the calculation of a property <br />tax bill. These include the State Legislature which establishes property <br />classes and class rates as well as State Aid levels, the County assessor's <br />office that assigns property classes and determines valuations, and <br />individual taxingjurisdictions such as the City, County, School District, <br />and miscellaneous taxingjurisdictions. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that Little Canada has a long history of <br />nominal tax increases. He presented a graph showing the City's tax levy <br />history since 1990 which he noted has been virtually flat. In 2000 the City <br />reduced the tax levy by over 8%, and for 2001 a 3.81% increase is <br />proposed which is the first increase in the net levy in a number years. The <br />Administrator reported that the history of nominal increases is a direct <br />result of the Mayor and Council's efforts to hold the line on property tax <br />increases. <br />The Administrator presented a pie chart which shows the distribution of <br />tax dollar based on a median value home of $136,800. He noted that for <br />School District #623, 36% of the total tax bill for this home would go to <br />the School District, 41% would go to the Comity, 7% would go to <br />miscellaneous taxing jurisdictions, and the remaining 16% would go to the <br />