Agenda - Council - 01/11/2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

it on the tax roll and as the years go on, the debt from those past years of funding for the roads will go off. People will be able to see more road projects going on because there will be a dedicated fund for roads and which roads get done was an issue with the assessments. Some roads were put to the back of the road list because there were petitions against the roadwork. Councilmember Musgrove thought when looking at this budget, it should be remembered that the debt service will not be a part of the road funding. Councilmember Heineman referenced the general levy increase. He acknowledged that it is more favorable to see the budget shrinking to show fiscal responsibility and the Council should be looking for ways to do that. There is also an issue where, as a resident commented, road maintenance is behind and that is why last year the City Council voted on the franchise fee, a tax to generate enough revenue to cover the roads. He appreciated the Mayor's point of view but replied to the comment that residents knew what to expect, that tonight it was shown residents didn't know that on average, there was a 15% tax increase because it wasn't listed on the budget but hidden in the utility bills. The 18% is a shocking number, and it is because the roads need to be caught up. He noted it is not actually an 18% increase because if there was a 15% increase last year, this year it's a 3% increase. He stated the numbers do look shocking but the franchise fee is being offset now. Councilmember Heineman referenced the tax capacity table and commented that it is more favorable to be in the middle or as low to the bottom as possible in regard to the least taxed cities but this is a crucial time in Ramsey with growth and the City needs infrastructure to support it. Councilmember Heineman referenced the County Commissioner who indicated that all the surrounding cities are growing and traffic is going through Ramsey, which will be a benefit but also causes wear on the roads and that needs to be accounted for. As far as funding for roads, he thought it was unfortunate that it is there but it is necessary. Regarding the increase in the general levy from 2014 to 2021, there was an average increase of 5.7%. This year there is a 5% increase. Comparative to prior years, the Council has done a good job of keeping the general levy down, especially with inflation. He listed increases in other cost of living items and felt that going from a 5.7% to a 5% increase was pretty good but he recognized there will be a hit to fix the roads. He commented that the Council saw that fixing the roads is a priority though they differ on the solution. He noted that fixing the roads and slowing spending are priorities and this is the best solution for that. Councilmember Riley commented this is a public hearing and asked if there were others who wanted to speak. Eric Vollmuth, 8845 176th Avenue, asked why the franchise fee was repealed in favor of this levy as far as the roads. Councilmember Heineman answered that certain members on the City Council looked at the franchise fee as not being necessarily sustainable, though others may say that it was sustainable. However, if the actual numbers are looked at from 2022 to 2030, in only two of those years the franchise fee covered the actual cost of the road projects that were outlined. He stated the City has a slush fund or rainy -day fund that can help cover those costs but the franchise fee being stagnant at $1.9 million didn't cover some of the years. Councilmember Heineman noted that by making City Council / December 14, 2021 Page 8 of 19