2015.09.22 CC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

September 22, 2015 Page 5 of 7 6:30 p.m. (the second Tuesday of the month). She reported the City Council received the 2016 City Manager Recommended Budget at the Council Worksession on August 25, 2015. This was followed with subsequent discussions at the September 1 st, 8th, and 22nd Council Worksessions. The City Manager's Recommended 2016 General Fund Budget is $14,232,900, an increase of 5.72% over the 2015 Amended Budget. This does not translate into a coiz-eslx)nd6g increase in the levy as many of these additional costs are funded by non - levy dollars. She reviewed the proposed Tax Levy and 2016 in detail with the Council, along with the proposed increase to the Xcel Energy franchise fees. The key achievements and projects within the budget were noted for each department within the City. In addition, the benefits of the license bureau and increased hours were discussed. She reviewed how the proposed levy would impact the average property owner, as well as how the New Brighton levy compared to neighboring communities. Manager Lotter provided comment on the City's cooperative efforts, joint powers agreements and partnerships that assist the City in keeping expenditures down. The ccx)perative services available at the Community Center were also noted. He was proud that the City has held its spending fairly consistent over the past decade while keeping services at the same high level. Finance Director Davitt reviewed the next steps for the budget and tax levy. She requested comments or questions finm the Council and recommended appmva l of the preliminary budget and 3.86% tax levy. Motion by Mayor Jacobsen, seconded by Councilmember Jacobsen to reduce the preliminary tax levy to 2.0% for 2016. Mayor Jacobsen appreciated the work that has been done by staff regarding the long term financial planning and proposed tax levy. He believed that staff could adjust the budget slightly in order to reach a 2.0% tax levy increase. Councilmember Bauman reported she would not support the 2016 budget and tax levy due to the proposed fianchise fee increase. She explained how the City was proposing to increase property taxes by 3.86% while also doubling franchise fees. She could not support the use of fianchise fees to cover City expenses. She believed that cuts need to be made. She discussed how incomes were on the decline given the rising prices of goods and services. She did not support the additional taxation of New Brighton property owners. Councilmember Strub commented that he could not support the 2.0% tax levy. He supported the 3.86% tax levy as previously discussed by the Council. He believed that the City has shown great financial restraint. He recommended that the Council support stag's recommendation. Councilmember Burg was surprised by Mayor Jacobsen's motion. She discussed how the tax levy has been reduced from over 10% to 3.86%. She reiterated that this was a preliminary levy and explained that the Council could continue to work on reducing the budgiot over the next three months. Councilmember Bauman clarified there has not been any cuts within the budget to bring the tax levy down from 10% to 3.86%. Rather, additional fianchise fees were being collected to cover the City's expenses. Councilmember Burg understood that staffwas proposing a revenue shift. She reported that she was supportive of keeping, all City services in place. Again, she was surprised by the Mayor's motion, but believed that staff could find another $140,000 within the budget to cut. Councilmember Jacobsen thanked the Council for the healthy discussion. He saw there had been some minor reductions within the budget. However, he anticipated that additional discussions were warranted. He discussed the Council's history with the budget and tax levy and believed that the levy amount would be reduced from 3.86% prior to the end of the year. City Manager Lotter reported that the budget brought before the Council had no staffing increases. He commented that staffhas been downsized to such a point, that no fiuther cuts could be made. He explained that streets were going to be a large expense for the City going forward in order for the City to properly maintain its infrastructure. He discussed the existence of the franchise fee noting it has been in place for more than a decade. He described how this fee would assist the City with sIxwd ng, out the burden of cost to a variety of properties versus just homeowners. He stated a lot of care and thought went into preparing the budget. He indicated the golf course requires supplemental funds on a yearly basis and this was being funded through property taxes. He reported that staff takes the financial responsibility of the City very seriously. He discussed how staffwas shouldering more of a burden each year given the fact that additional staffwas not