My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1986/10/06
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1986
>
Agenda Packets - 1986/10/06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/1/2025 2:35:16 PM
Creation date
4/1/2025 2:35:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
10/6/1986
Description
Work Session
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
132
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
Considering all the districts, It can be seen from the above that the city will <br />have over 96% and the school And county districts will have over 99% of <br />each respective district available for normal growth of tax base or <br />valuation. Applying the percentage of the total mill rate In 1986 levied by <br />each taxing jurisdiction to the projected mill rate and the estimated tax <br />Increment received reveals the annual loss of tax dollars by each taxing <br />jurisdiction as listed in the table below assuming development would occur <br />without public Assistance. <br />The finance plan Indicates we anticipate a tax increment at build out as <br />follows: <br />Captured Tax <br />Assessed Increment <br />Valuation Received <br />Tax increment Finance District $10,516,892 $1,052,520 <br />Based on the Curren' mill rate, the estimnted taxes received would be as <br />follows for the taxing bodies: <br />Mitts <br />Percent <br />Tax increment <br />City of Mounds View <br />13.876 <br />13.9% <br />S 145,932 <br />County of Ramsey <br />31.867 <br />31.8% <br />335,142 <br />School District #621 <br />47.069 <br />47.0% <br />495,019 <br />Spec. ind. School <br />Dist. #916 <br />1.160 <br />1.2% <br />12,200 <br />Other <br />6.107 <br />6.1% <br />64,227 <br />Total <br />100.79 <br />100.0% <br />$1,052,520 <br />The following table represents the additional mills that would have to be <br />levied to compensate for the loss of tax dollars in estimated tax increments <br />for each taxing jurisdiction. The tax Increments derived from the <br />redevelopment project alluded to In the tax increment district would not be <br />available to any of the taxing jurisdictions were It not for public <br />intervention by the City. Although the Increases in assessed value due to <br />development will not be available for the application of the mill levy for the <br />durnVon of the tax Increment financing district, this new assessed value <br />could eventually permit a mill levy decrease. if it could be assumed that <br />the captured assessed value was available for each taxing jurisdiction, the <br />non -receipt of tax dollars represented as tax increments may be determined. <br />This deteembintion is facilitated by estimallnP hot much the mill levy for <br />property outside of the tax Increment financing district would have to be <br />Increased to raise the same amount of tax dollars in each taxing jurisdiction <br />thnt would be available if the projects occurred without the assistance of <br />the City. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.