Laserfiche WebLink
<br />an increase of $2,311,470 or 17.7% from 2021. The general fund budget of $14,543,640 is a <br />1.11% increase over 2021, and estimated tax capacity rate of 42.943%. <br /> <br />Finance Director Lund stated the pavement management levy is the largest segment of the <br />budget, and it replaces the current franchise fee. She added the pavement management levy <br />represents a total increase of $1,673,227, or 72.4% of the total levy. <br /> <br />Finance Director Lund stated, with regard to personnel funding, the $557,743 levy increase <br />includes $307,945 for existing employee adjustments and $249,797 for new personnel: a part- <br />time receptionist/secretary; a full-time IT Systems & Security Administrator; and a full-time <br />Parks Maintenance Worker. <br /> <br />Finance Director Lund stated the EDA authority has a levy of $75,360, and that stays the same. <br />She added the tax rate of 42.943% was recommended for approval by the EDA Board. <br /> <br />Finance Director Lund stated the final budget will be reviewed for approval at the City Council’s <br />December 14, 2021 regular meeting. Preliminary tax statements will be sent from Anoka County <br />from November 8-27, 2021, and the numbers are subject to change until final adoption on <br />December 14, 2021. <br /> <br />Councilmember Musgrove asked whether the savings from the bond sale will be used to offset <br />personnel requests. <br /> <br />Finance Director Lund stated the bond savings will be a direct result of the reduction of municipal <br />center debt and will not affect personnel costs. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Musgrove, seconded by Councilmember Heineman, to Adopt <br />Resolution #21-279 Adopting Proposed 2022 Payable Tax Levies (General, Pavement <br />Management, EDA and Debt Services) and Schedule Public Hearing for December 14, 2021; <br />Adopt Resolution #21-280 Adopting Proposed 2022 General Fund Budget and Resolution #21- <br />281 Adopting Proposed 2022 EDA Budget. <br /> <br />Further discussion: <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff stated he cannot support this motion as it is not a long-term plan that <br />will save money, nor a valid replacement for franchise fees. He added the City Council was told <br />that any plan would fully fund the roads without dipping into reserves, but that is not the case. He <br />noted there are other numbers he is not happy about, including a very large impact on the City’s <br />business community, who will have a significant increase in their taxes. <br /> <br />Councilmember Woestehoff stated the proposed levy affects the average homeowner more than a <br />franchise fee would have. He added the decision was made months ago to do away with the <br />franchise fee, even though it was the most economical way to proceed. He added $330,000 less <br />for roads is not a solution, or a replacement for the franchise fee but rather a stop gap, which the <br />City Council was told was not going to happen. <br /> <br />City Council / September 28, 2021 <br />Page 7 of 18 <br /> <br />