09-08-10 Council Workshop Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTIJS CITY COUNCIL SIJPTEMBER 8, 2010 Fire Department equipment. He also noted that permit revenues has historically been budgeted conservatively. However, the City's permit revenue and gambling revenues have been down over the past few years, thereby negating surplus transfers McGraw asked about looking ahead to 2012. The Administrator indicated that the City has some ability to absorb State aid cuts in 2011, but there is uncertainty as to what will happen in 2012. The Administrator again noted that given that the street program is moving into a mill and overlay cycle, that will put less demand on the Infrastructure Fund and minimize the need for levy increases. Blesener expressed concern with the use of City reserve dollars, noting that these are one-time dollars. He noted that over 50% of the City's budget is the cost of protective services. Therefore, the vast majority of expenses go toward police and fire protection as well as street maintenance. Blesener felt that the preliminary 2011 Budget should be set at a 3.94% Gross Levy increase, which will provide the City with the $179,000 cushion to absorb the coming State aid cuts. The City Administrator also noted that the City has some reserves from 2009 as well as the franchise fee on electrical that would provide some relief. He again cautioned on the impact of utilizing one-time dollars to resolve long-term budget issues. Keis asked if there were auy situations wherein the City could change the levy. The Administrator noted that once the preliminary levy amount is certified, the City can only go down in certifying the Tnal levy. He noted that the City can certify the levy at a level that makes up for State aid cuts made in previous years. The proposal before the Council does not proposal air increase at that level. Again, whatever is certified as the preliminary 2011 levy cannot be exceeded in the final levy amount that will be set in December. The Administrator noted there is always the chance that when the Legislature meets, they would allow some recertification process for lost aid dollars, but that was not anticipated. The Council discussed the City's 2011 LGA and MVHC levels. The Administrator noted that MVHC is actually part of the City's tax levy numbers that the State has indicated they will pay on behalf of lower valued homes. The Council discussed in detail the options relative to a preliminary 2011 Budget levy increase, again focusing on the City's inability to increase that levy in adopting its final 2011 Budget in December. The Adminish•ator pointed out that the levy increase varies from taxpayer to taxpayer based on property valuation. The Director noted that the County 6