Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024.08.29 CC Minutes-Midyear Budget ReviewMINUTES City Council-Midyear Budget Review Hugo City Hall Thursday, August 29, 2024 6:00 p.m. Mayor Weidt called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. PRESENT: Klein, Miron, Petryk, Strub, Weidt ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: City Administrator Bryan Bear, Finance Director Anna Wobse, Fire Chief Jim Compton, Public Works Director Scott Anderson, Community Development Intern Phoebe Brown, City Clerk Michele Lindau Finance Director Anna Wobse began by saying the City had not yet received the tax breakdown from Washington County, so numbers may be slightly different from what will be reported on the preliminary levy. Current numbers estimated a 2% decrease in the market value, and changes to the Homestead Market Value Exclusion Program increased the maximum exclusion amount, reducing taxable market values by $34,650,000 from last year. Council had been on a flat tax policy but has deviated the past two years because of higher property values. Staff prepared the budget using the same tax rate as last year. Wobse recommended to continue using the contingency budgeting technique for expenditures. Without unforeseen events, there would be a general fund surplus for the street CIP or equipment purchases. The $200,000 earmarked in previous years for flat tax rate stabilization would not be in the 2025 budget. Keeping the 2024 tax rate, the total levy for 2025 could not exceed $11,997,855. This would be a 2.6% decrease from the 2024 levy. Anna explained there were three outstanding bond issues the City totaling $15,145,000 or $889 per capita, which was under the statewide average of $1,936 per capita. The non-general fund tax levies totaled $1,859,964. A contribution of $500,000 was added to the Street CIP last year but would not be added this year. There was a need to figure out how to fund trails, which would require further discussion. The Equipment Levy was set at $300,000, Stormwater Levy at $278,788, and the Parks Improvement Levy will remain at $92,000 unless otherwise directed, The Firefighter’s Relief Levy was set at $29,176. General fund operations made up the largest part of the levy. There were 26 regular full-time employees and three vacant positions. Staff had used the League of MN Cities online salary survey to compare Hugo to 13 other cities of similar population, and found that, excluding the City Administrator’s wage, Hugo averaged -2% below others. A salary adjustment was included in the budget for a 3% cost of living and a 2% salary matrix increase resulting in a total increase of $140,500 to the General Fund. Health insurance went up 13.4%, but there was no change in deductibles. 2024 was the first year with the full-time fire chief. All remaining officer positions in the Fire Department were funded for as well as the continued retention program. The City received $703,253 in 2024 as a one-time public safety aid payment that needed to be used for public safety. This was placed in a special fund to pay for a new deputy position for five years. Estimating revenues conservatively at $956,116 resulted in a General Operating Levy at Minutes for Midyear Budget Review on September 30, 2023 Page 2 of 3 $9,140.036. Totaling all levies, the proposed 2025 levy totaled $11,997,855. Anna talked about fiscal disparities saying Hugo receives more back than it contributes, and the City’s proposed distribution will increase 14.45% equaling $1,015,758 Anna talked about the tax impact of the proposed levy. The median valued homestead of $389,400 after the market value exclusion would see a tax of $1,380 at the proposed 36.522% rate. This would decrease the tax from 2024 by $116. Hugo’s tax rate had always fallen near the middle in comparison to other cities in Washington County, but it was noted that some other cities charged for other services. Hugo does not collect any additional fees. Residents would see a decreased tax bill from Hugo, but other districts collected taxes, so overall taxes may increase. City Engineer Mark Erichson provided information on the 2025 Street CIP. The CIP is evaluated each year by working with the Public Works Department to determine what the condition of the roadways are. The City was waiting for MnDOT to finish their rating on the bridges to see if they qualified for funding. If needed, street projects would be rescheduled to accommodate an upcoming bridge project if necessary. Mark shared costs associated with each project saying some will be state aid eligible for reimbursement. He shared discussions had with Lino Lakes regarding Elmcrest Avenue due to the expected increase in traffic when Otter Lake Road in Lino Lakes is constructed, saying there may be cost sharing with Lino. There were also concerns regarding 165th Street, partly due to the size of the project and lack of development to help pay for it. Council discussed the CIP and were concerned about unfunded road projects, two bridge repair projects, and trail maintenance. No money was budgeted for Elmcrest Avenue or 165th Street, and those roads were anticipated to be highly traveled with the construction of Otter Lake Road. There were questions about the safety of the bridges, specifically Fable Hills Bridge. Erichson responded that the structural integrity was there, it was getting very costly to maintain the decking. Aging trail networks had not been identified for improvements, costs, or funding. There was discussion about reverting back to following the flat tax pate policy and the 39.403% tax rate. It was noted the budget as presented could fund the projects identified on the current CIP until 2029, but they were rough estimates and did not include other anticipated projects. Anna stated that by following policy, $800,000 could be added to the Street Fund. Council members expressed desire to keep the proposed tax rate but were concerned the City would be getting further behind. The normal rate would allow the City to address upcoming unfunded needs and prevent a huge rate increase if they waited. Council members commented on the need for safe, decent roads. The proposed budget would keep the City functioning as usual, but the sacrifice would go to the street fund. There was discussion on amending the assessment policy, which had been in place since 2013. Road projects had increased significantly, and this was part of the equation to add stability to the fund in the future. It was noted that the fund currently had a healthy balance, but at the end of five years, it will have dropped way down. It was generally agreed a workshop was necessary to discuss strategies to budget for it. Minutes for Midyear Budget Review on September 30, 2023 Page 3 of 3 It was understood by Council they could set the preliminary tax rate higher and could back down from it, but not increase it. The budget had been prepared at the lower tax rate, and if it was going to return to the higher rate, it was agreed by Council there needed to be an explanation for it. It was agreed to set the budget at the higher rate for approval at the next Council meeting, hold the workshop and decide to continue to deviate from the flat tax rate policy or go back to following the policy for the 2025 levy. Discussion on Urban and Rural Tax Rates City Administrator Bryan Bear introduced the new Community Development Intern Phoebe Brown. Phoebe explained that the MN Statute that allowed for Hugo to establish different rural and urban service districts with different municipal tax rates. When the Village of Hugo and Oneka Township consolidated in 1971, these two districts were created due to the separate services received in each district. To be in the Rural District, three requirements needed to be met: unplatted; not developed commercial, industrial, or urban residential; and not benefiting from City services. One exception was, since 1987, the County moved any rural parcel that had been platted into the Urban Service District. Statute also allowed for establishment of a benefit ratio, which is the percentage of the tax capacity rate, currently set at 90%. The Urban rate was 36.7% with 6,134 parcels. The Rural rate was 33.06% and under 1,400 parcels. It was also noted that many parcels in the Rural District were enrolled in the Green Acres and Rural Preservation Program, which provided property tax relief for qualifying farmland. Abolishing the two separate tax districts had been discussed in 1978 and in 1986 arguing they both benefitted equally from general fund services. Rural residents argued they did not receive the same services; it took longer for emergency services to reach them, and it would harm agriculture, destroying the rural character. It was also argued that rural areas received services such as dust control and ditching projects. Options were discussed such as amending the policy to equalize the districts, change the benefit ratio, or reclassify certain parcels. It was agreed a workshop should be held at a later date. The meeting adjourned at 7:57 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Michele Lindau, City Clerk