My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-29-11-WS
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
2010-2019
>
2011
>
08-29-11-WS
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/13/2011 2:52:23 PM
Creation date
9/13/2011 2:51:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
Document
8-29-11 Worksession Minutes
General - Type
8-29-11 Worksession Minutes
Category
8-29-11 Worksession Minutes
Date
8/29/2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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).
View images
View plain text
ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION — AUGUST 29, 2011 2 <br />Mayor Pro -Tem Holmes asked for clarification on the reference to local tax rate at 24.180% in <br />2011 and 25.050% in 2012. <br />Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson explained those figures refer to the <br />local taxable rate on the local portion of the levy. <br />Mayor Pro -Tem Holmes referred to the chart on Page 3 of the 2012 Preliminary Budget, <br />specifically the table at the top of the page and asked if property taxes will be based on the <br />$45,600 Market Value After Exclusion. <br />Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson responded that is correct. <br />Mayor Pro -Tem Holmes then asked if the City would get the Market Value Exclusion <br />reimbursed. <br />Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson responded that the City will no <br />longer be reimbursed by the State. That amount is now excluded from the tax. What used to <br />happen, she explained, is that taxes were based on the Home Market Value and the State was <br />supposed to reimburse the cities for the Market Value Credit, but they have not been doing that. <br />So what the State did was lower the taxable value. <br />Mayor Pro -Tem Holmes asked for clarification on the tables on Page 4. <br />Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson reviewed the figures in the chart on <br />Page 3 which was calculated based on last year's rates and the chart on Page 4 shows this year's <br />figures. She referred to the chart on the bottom of the page and pointed out that the tax for a <br />$272,800 home would be an annual decrease of $4.06 but the impact from the legislative change <br />is an annual increase of $14.28. She further stated that the total net impact ($14.28 minus the <br />$4.06) is an annual increase of $10.22. <br />Mayor Pro -Tem Holmes questioned the figure of $3,070,525 at the top of the chart on Page 5 but <br />on the other chart that same item is listed as $3,040,964 on Page 3. <br />Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson explained that both figures are <br />correct; the $3,070,525 includes delinquent taxes and other miscellaneous tax revenue items. <br />Mayor Pro -Tem Holmes stated that on Page 6 in the chart at the top of the page MHVC is listed <br />for $61,774 and asked if Finance had adjusted too much. <br />Director of Finance and Administrative Services Iverson responded that previously whatever <br />we determined our levy was, we would certify that to the County then the homestead credit would <br />reduce the property taxes paid by the property owner and the City was to have been reimbursed <br />that amount by the State. However, the State only reimbursed the City fully one of the nine years <br />the program was in effect. She stated since the City knew they weren't going to be reimbursed by <br />the State, we artificially set the levy higher. She explained that the chart on Page 6 is for the 2012 <br />budget and reflects the major increases for revenue. The MVHC is an increase as we no longer <br />have to budget for not receiving the monies from the state. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.