Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ARDEN HILLS CITY COUNCIL - SEPTEMBER 11,2000 <br /> <br />32 <br /> <br />Council consider adopting Resolution No. 00-29, Resolution Clarifying Proposed Sums of <br />. Money to be Levied for Levy Year 2000: Payable in 2001. <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski stated felt that there should be a net levy increase of 4% this year. <br />She fclt that with the amount of items budgeted for 2001, a 2.5% increase would not be practical. <br />Shc acknowledged that there may be grant money in the future, however, she did not want the <br />City to embark on a project only to find that the resources are not available. <br /> <br />Mr. Post noted that of the two large items that would not be covcred by the 2.5% increase, the <br />addition of a personnel position will reoccur each year, whereas the County Road E light pole <br />replacement would be a one-time expense. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski moved to adopt Resolution No. 00-29, Clarifying <br />Proposed Sums of Money to be Levied for Levy Year 2000: Payable in 2001, <br />with a net levy increase of 4%. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated that, based on the discussions regarding the status of this year's budget, he <br />felt that all of the 2001 expenditures can be covered by a 2.5% levy increasc, with the exception <br />of the staffing position and the new light poles. I-Ie stated that he would prefer for the Council to <br />approve a 2.5% incrcase. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mayor Probst stated that if the time comes when the additional Staff person is needed and a grant <br />is not available, then the City will have to make some difficult decisions at that time on how to <br />capture the funds elsewhere in the budget. He stated that he was uncomfortable with increasing <br />the net levy at this point in the process. He pointed out that any increase in the proposed levy of <br />less than an additional 2.5% to 3% will not be sufficient. <br /> <br />The motion failed due to lack of second. <br /> <br />Councilmember Aplikowski reitcrated that she did not feel that a 2.5% incrcase was practical. <br />She pointed out that the 2000 budget year has not yet ended and that the levy limit could be <br />reduced later. She felt that it would be foolish for the City to limit its abilities. <br /> <br />Mr. Post noted that the Truth in Taxation notice will be based on the amount of levy increase <br />approved this evening. <br /> <br />MOTION: <br /> <br />Councilmember Larson moved and Mayor Probst seconded a motion to adopt <br />Resolution No. 00-29, Clarifying Proposed Sums of Money to be Levied for Levy <br />Year 2000: Payable in 2001, with a net levy increase of2.5%. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Councilmember Grant requested confirmation that the result of this motion would be that the <br />City would not be budgeting the two large items discussed earlier. Mr. Post stated that the two <br />large items were not encompassed in the 2.5% levy increase. <br />